FEDERAL JUDGE RULES PARTS OF PATRIOT ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL

MSNBC ^ | 1/26/04

[areafiftyone]

Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional. Just breaking on the ticker. Looking for more info!

[B Knotts]

Exactly right.

[Quick1]

Well, I guess that proves that the Patriot Act is working!

Does that mean the garlic I keep on my dashboard is doing a good job of keeping away vampires?

[Quick1]

Great post!

[TexasGunLover]

So sad... DIMRATS win again...

[Benjo]

I'm glad a federal judge somewhere finally stood up for the constitution. All you have to do is claim that some new law will protect us from terrorists these days and half the people in the country are willing to tear up the constitution and throw away free speech (which most people don't really value very much anyway, especially when they hear other people saying something they don't want to hear).

[AAABEST]

About time.

Great breaking news. JR should open a section called "good news" for articles like this.

[b4its2late]

Could it be the 9th circus?

[Reagan Man]

President Clinton also named six U.S. District Court judges: Audrey B. Collins, Central District of California;

A dubious connection at the very least.

[William McKinley]

If the basis for overturning it is that this is unconstitutionally vague:

giving expert advice or assistance to groups designated foreign terrorist organizations

it should be rewritted as

giving any advice or assistance to groups designated foreign terrorist organizations.

[Modernman]

Cole declared the ruling "a victory for everyone who believes the war on terrorism ought to be fought consistent with constitutional principles."

A valid point, missed in all the noise. We don't want to burn down the village in order to save it.

[petercooper]

Show us where one person's constitutional rights have been taken away.

You can't.

[Modernman]

giving any advice or assistance to groups designated foreign terrorist organizations.

How about adding the word "knowingly" in front of this definition? Plus, you need to more narrowly define "advice" and "assistance" so that it doesn't emcompass legal advice etc.

[rwfromkansas]

You psychos applauding this are applauding the destruction of a provision that outlaws aiding terrorist organizations by giving expert assistance.

You should be a ashamed of yourselves.

[William McKinley]

Fine. Insert the word knowingly, provide an exception for legal advice given by an attorney to a client.

Straightforward.

[DMCA]

You do understand that giving expert advice would extend to a computer consultant who had worked on their computer systems, even if he didn't know they where terrorists.

It is a vaguely written law and it should have been written more clearly.

[William McKinley]

Isn't it amazing?

[rwfromkansas]

No expert would be called upon by terrorist groups to explain the greatness of non-violence.

This female judge doesn't know what she's doing.

[Merdoug]

It's that pesky Constitution getting in the way again,...
(sarcasm)

[Modernman]

You psychos applauding this are applauding the destruction of a provision that outlaws aiding terrorist organizations by giving expert assistance.

Read the thread. The definition is so broad, it could be used to prosecute you if you unwittingly gave street directions to a member of a terrorist group.

Nobody is saying people should be free to help terrorist groups. We're saying the definition of "help" should be better defined.