Many Americans seem to believe there's a constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy spelled out in the Bill of Rights. There isn't.

The Fourth Amendment asserts our right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures. The concept of privacy is nebulous, as much as it feels like the right thing.

A fairly large number of people will be required to submit to background checks, including fingerprint examinations, starting Aug. 1, as a result of a law passed by the North Dakota Legislature. Perhaps the largest impact will be on college students, faculty and staff, although they're not totally being singled out. Members of the real estate commission, for example, will be printed and be checked out for a criminal record.

They may chafe at the perceived intrusion, but the intent of the law is good.

It is to protect vulnerable groups of people, children being the main ones of concern. College students in teaching programs can be checked out on the authority of the university system, the law says. College counselors and students in physical therapy and social work are likely candidates.

The number involved is striking. It's estimated that perhaps 4,000 students and 800 university system employees will come under the requirement. The state attorney general's office, which will process the requests, figures that the law will result in 24,000 more criminal background checks than it normally does a year.

Each check of criminal history records runs $30, plus a fee for fingerprint analysis. The state expects to collect $691,400 in fees during the 2007-09 biennium. That will cover the state records check and the fee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The entities submitting the names to be checked out will pay the fees.

The program is not cheap to operate. The appropriation from the general fund for the biennium is $459,877. More personnel will need to be hired by the attorney general's office to handle the added workload.

But it's not easy to set a value on the well-being and even the lives of people who may be protected as a result of the program.

The impetus for strengthening background checking in general came as a reaction to the murder of Valley City State University student Mindy Morgenstern. A state senator from Valley City, himself a university employee, sponsored and pushed for the bill.

There is discretion allowed to the chancellor of higher education and officials of the university system in deciding which students and employees should be checked out. It's admittedly more important to find out about students preparing for some professions.

The purpose is not to pry into the private details of anyone's life. A history of criminal conviction, however, is quite a different matter. Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem had it right: "If I'm living in a (college) dormitory, I'd like to know if my (resident assistant) is a convicted sex offender or a burglar."

If someone with a criminal history can be weeded out by an inquiry into records before taking a position of power and trust, so be it.

But the biggest crime - or shame - is that we live in a time when the checks are needed.