American Politics Explained
Posted on 01/21/2014 9:05:21 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
the supreme court cannot overturn natural rights... only the people giving them up will those rights be denied.
t
NSA searches your electronic papers/effects every waking moment.
4th is dead.
The author clearly doesn’t understand the Constitution, SCOTUS rulings, legal precedent, or the question before the Court in this case.
WTell makes good points. Also remember, recording devices are your friends. Next time she makes such a statement, get it on tape.
Strange, I don’t see oral arguments posted for this yet.
I see that a lot from this particular blogger.
That they aren't looks like a possible violation of the sixth.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Exigent circumstances!
Heck, the 13th went out of fashion with the holding of the ACA as constitutional.
It’s the anonymous (thus unreliable) tip without corroboration that is the problem.
The cops can follow the car and pull it over if an independent lawful reason exists.
But to stop based solely on the tip is way out of line Constitutionally speaking.
So true and sickening.
We’re approaching the point where being a conservative religious person (traditional marriage supporter, pro-life), Republican/Tea Party (pro-gun, small government) or right libertarian (suspicious of government, privacy advocate) IS a crime.
It is already considered a suspicious matter per government terrorist watch criteria.
Daryl Dixon of The Walking Dead is seen as more dangerous than the real life Muslim terrorists who regularly behead relatives and blow up each other.
“It takes an ammendment to repeal an ammendment, ala Prohibition.”
But it only takes an Administration and a lopsided Supreme Court to make an amendment a waste of ink.
The normal caveats apply, as you can't always tell what the justices are really thinking by their questioning, but my reading puts this as a big loss of 4th amendment rights. Alito was making rediculous comments about someone having nukes in the trunk of the car to try to justify allowing pulling people over because of an anonymous tip. They all seem to be on board with the police disrupting your life because some anonymous jackass phones in a tip claiming you ran "almost ran them off the road".
So, after they publish this, be sure to keep it in mind if there is anyone that you want to have the police hassle. Just get a tracfone, so it can't be traced back to you, and you're golden. Because, you never know, someone might just have a backpack nuke in their trunk. It's all for our safety don't you know. Remember this if you ever happen to notice "Justice" Alito driving down the road beside you. I'm sure he won't mind being pulled over.
Thanks.
Commie Bastards...
Zeugma, the most common anonymous tip is the one where a cop calls it in.
I haven’t read the transcript yet so thank you for your feedback.
For obvious reasons I hope that Alito ends up in the minority on this one.
Were I sitting next to him on the bench I would have commented that the allegation of a nuke in someone’s car might indeed give me enough concern to check it out. And if I prevent it from going off and saving countless lives then great!
But if I come across a bag of weed along the way then forget it. It’s going to be inadmissible in court. Otherwise cops will just use the excuse of an anonymous tip to pull over anybody whenever they want.
It’s like the old 24 episodes. Yea Jack Bauer obtained statements and evidence illegally all the time. And we didn’t care! But in such extreme (far more extreme than drunk driving allegations) circumstances the collection of evidence wasn’t for the purposes of a criminal prosecution. It was to prevent a calamity.
To me Scalia is the key to winning this vote.
Alito and Thomas rarely ever see an illegal search so that doesn’t surprise me. Kennedy and Roberts often sides with the cops as well (so called law and order conservatives).
The same justices who distrust the government the most often seem to bend over backwards to accommodate the cops. We really need more libertarian minded justices.
And not the libertarian types who invent rights like abortion and gay “marriage”. Those are just liberal social engineering commie bastards.
I mean consistent libertarian constitutionalists.
Ditto
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.