Posted on 12/11/2007 10:22:00 AM PST by IrishMike
LOS ANGELES -- A federal appeals court ruled that some portions of the U.S. Patriot Act dealing with foreign terrorist organizations are unconstitutional because the language is too vague to be understood by a person of average intelligence.
The ruling released Monday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco affirms a 2005 decision by U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins, who ruled on a petition seeking to clear the way for U.S. groups and individuals to assist political organizations in Turkey and Sri Lanka.
Collins said language in the Patriot Act was vague on matters involving training, expert advice or assistance, personnel and service to foreign terrorist organizations. Her ruling prevented the federal government from enforcing those provisions as they apply to the terrorist groups named in the lawsuit.
Without clear language, the plaintiffs argued, those who provide assistance to foreign terrorist organizations could be subject to prison terms of up to 15 years.
Charles Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said his agency was reviewing the ruling to determine a response.
In its 27-page decision, the appeals court said that to survive a vagueness challenge, a statute ''must be sufficiently clear to put a person of ordinary intelligence on notice that his or her contemplated conduct is unlawful.''
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
The 9th Circus, still aiding America’s enemies.
“A federal appeals court ruled that some portions of the U.S. Patriot Act dealing with foreign terrorist organizations are unconstitutional because the language is too vague to be understood by a person of average intelligence.”
What the hell does that mean? lol If it’s vague, then it’s vague...it has nothing to do with someone’s ability to understand the content.
P.S. A person of average intelligence is overqualified to serve on the 9th Circus.
I don’t know if it would confuse a person of average or above intelligence, but it’s obvious that it confused Audrey.
That’s discriminatory to people of below-average intelligence.
I say the 9th Circus should repent.
What they are saying is that they need to “dumb” it down so the people in Los Angeles can understand it? Figures when there is only a 30% graduation rate in the high schools.
So now we are at a “adverage intellegence” test,
How long until they move the bar to a “Complete Idiot” test?
“In its 27-page decision, the appeals court said that to survive a vagueness challenge, a statute ‘’must be sufficiently clear to put a person of ordinary intelligence on notice that his or her contemplated conduct is unlawful.’’”
Wonder what the Ninth would say if someone were to quote this ruling as a precedent on IRS regulations. You know, the ones where even the IRS gives out bad advice on how to comply?
How long until they move the bar to a “Complete Idiot” test?
...................................................
As soon as you register as a dRAT, you get an A.
Don’t know how the 9th Circus can rule on average intelligence, most of them haven’t achieved it yet.
And, the 9th Circuit knows this. They are legislating from the bench, and quite clumsily.
This is a mere glimpse of what life will be in Hillaryland.
So does this mean the US tax code is unConstitutional?
It’s no more vague than many parts of the Constitution that they find no problems with “interpreting”...theye’ve come full circle. Okay, so now they kick it up to be overturned for upteenth time. For them, if it says “patriot” in the title it must be evil and un-american.
The Patriot Act should be repealled.
NOt because of “civil rights violations’ it simply doesn’t do so.
It should be repealed because its a FAILURE.
We need to get the 9th to rule on the Internal Revenue Code using the same standard. OK, the USSC would overrule them, but it could be interesting for a few months if they did that.
Let me ask....if it is “repealled”, what is the alternative?
Perhaps by something that actually helps catch terrorists, as opposed to say pornographers?
Just a thought...
You’ll have to excuse me. I come out of management in the electronics industry. When an employee came to me and wanted to change something they didn’t like, I would always ask....”Change to what? Give me specifics.”
As far as rewriting all laws to be understandable to the least common denominator (using ability to vote as a benchmark) they will need to be understood by the feeble-minded.
I can hardly wait.
I say prosecute them. That sort of discrimination would violate several "civil rights" Acts...
I say this is an excellent opportunity to use the same logic against the existing tax code.
U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco: “*Americans* are dummies.”
‘You’ll have to excuse me. I come out of management in the electronics industry. When an employee came to me and wanted to change something they didn’t like, I would always ask....”Change to what? Give me specifics.”’
No problem, let me put it in terms you can relate to.
Your employee; ‘Boss, the refrigerator isn’t working’
You; ‘replace it then.’
The Patriot Act was legislation allegedly passed to combat ‘terrorism’.
Its failed to do so. You cannot name a single person on planet earth convicted via the Patriot Act of being a ‘terrorist’.
Thats why it should be abolished. It simply doesn’t do what we were told it would do at the time of its passage.
It doesn’t violate anyone’s ‘civil rights’.
Its just ineffective as a tool to combat terrorism.
OK...pretty simplistic but let me try:
Your employee; ‘Boss, the refrigerator isn’t working’
You; What do you suggest we do about it? Is it plugged in, is it worth repairing, should we replace it? What other alternatives do we have? What’s the impact if we do nothing or we just get rid of it?
“We the People, of Average Intelligence, In Order to Form A More Perfect Union”...
Well, basically, this would be true of ANY law.
The anti-terrorism law is clarified, however, because the government has a LIST of terrorist organizations. That’s certainly not vague.
It also has a right to go after people who raise money for new terrorist organization or renamed terrorist organizations, or terrorist organizations that are not yet on the list. Then the accused have their day in court and their opportunity to say they didn’t know it was a terrorist organization.
How else can this be done? The Ninth Circus, of course, really opposes the war on terror, like all good liberals, so that is their underlying motivation in issuing such a ruling. But a workable law against funding terrorism has to be vague around the edges. That’s what judges are for, not to throw out the whole law but to decide if it was fairly applied.
Who did the 9th Circuit use to bring their understanding up to "average intelligence"?
Well, I guess that means the whole Internal Revenue Code and CFR is unconstitutional also.
We would have never supported the “patriot” act here under a Clinton administration. I don’t support it now. The Constitution is clear : find probable cause, and get a warrant.
You're right. Since it was passed, we have had one major terrorist attack per week.
Uh, isn't that the INTENT? Sheesh! what dummies cloaked in black!
Get a warrant! That would have stopped 9/11 in it’s tracks. Dah!
‘What’s the impact if we do nothing....’
It gets applied to things it wasn’t designed to combat, like pornography.
’ or we just get rid of it?’
Thats my recommendation.
Yeah. Let’s throw the book at Al Qaeda! That’l teach ‘em to mess with the USA.
It should be repealed because its a FAILURE.
You’re right. Since it was passed, we have had one major terrorist attack per week.
Always nice to see the kids are playing on the internet.....That said;
The Patriot Act was sold to the American People as a means of combatting ‘terrorism’.
Its never been cited as the reason a terrorist was arrested.
Not ONCE.
It has been used for various domestic investigations of one type or another, but none of them were related to terrorists, nor ‘terrorism’.
This is how a government entity that was ‘designed’ to combat interstate prostitution grew into a agency that spends more money on PR than all of our armed forces combined.
(The FBI)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Seeking to bolster support for the Patriot Act, the Justice Department provided Congress on Tuesday with details of numerous cases in which the anti-terrorism law has been used.
...”The report says that in the period starting with the September 11 attacks and ending May 5 (2005), Justice Department terrorism investigations resulted in charges against 310 people, with 179 convictions or guilty pleas. The Patriot Act, it says, was instrumental in these cases.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/13/patriot.act/index.html
I knew before I clicked on the link that it was the 9th circus. IF Republicans weren’t wimps and traitors they would have broken the 9th up when they had the opportunity.
Isn’t there some “Liberals only” blog you guys can hurry over to?
I’ve seen the story you linked for me.
Note it doesn’t state the Patriot Act was successfully employed to arrest and convict anyone. Its used ‘after the fact’ in the few cases actually cited, and most of them have nothing to do with international terrorism based on wahabism/jihadism.
Thats my point. It did not work.
And because its embarrassing, various agencies are being urged to apply it to ANY CRIME, ANY INVESTIGATION.
In football, thats called ‘building up your stats’.
This isn’t a game.
There is nothing “liberal” about being a strict originalist when it comes to our Constitution. “Defending our Constituion” is the motto of this site last time I checked.
‘They already used it in my area to go after some homeless guy stealing copper wire.’
Thats about all its good for.
Sorry, copper theft isn’t a good enough reason to give the FBI carte blanche to look at my credit report without my knowledge.
Agreed.
That’s right Badeye, it’s not a game. Like Algers, people are actually getting killed by the bad guys. You are probably agast at other “unconstitutional” things, like what you may consider “torture”...turning down the thermostat, or making someone squat in an uncomfortable position for hours, or waterboarding. Too bad Al Qaeda doesn’t feel the same way about lopping off someone’s head.
We go back to pre-911? I don’t think so. Look, it may not be the best program in our history but it’s better than doing nothing. The reason I answered you the way I did was that we need to get our people involved. Our government surely isn’t doing a good job but with 300 million people in this country, we should be able to come up with something if we want to change it. Getting rid of the Patriot Act isn’t the answer. Changing it is, if it protects this country on a higher level.
‘That’s right Badeye, it’s not a game. Like Algers, people are actually getting killed by the bad guys. You are probably agast at other “unconstitutional” things, like what you may consider “torture”...turning down the thermostat, or making someone squat in an uncomfortable position for hours, or waterboarding. Too bad Al Qaeda doesn’t feel the same way about lopping off someone’s head.’
Its ‘too bad’ you aren’t reading my posts completely. I noted way up the thread there is no violation of anyone’s ‘civil rights’ via the Patriot Act....so your whole post here is built on a false premise.
Since you seem somewhat interested in my viewpoint, reread my posts on this thread in order, then respond.
It’ll save us both a lot of time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.