Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: D-fendr

I have never said anything but. I am against warrant less searches. In order to be legal it must conform to the 4th amendment. On this issue, the amendment is clear. If you look back up thread you will NEVER see me contradict that amendment. It was Justice Scalia’s by the way.

Attentiveness to privacy in the digital age should thus be front and center for any jurist, whether focusing on the text of the Fourth Amendment, the purposes for which it was signed, or our new world that the Founders scarcely could have imagined. Regardless of whom President Obama appoints to the Court, privacy in the 21st century is something on which many bedfellows can agree.


180 posted on 02/19/2016 7:04:26 PM PST by jessduntno (Steady, Reliable, and (for now) Republican - Donald Trump, (D, R, I, D, R, I, R - NY) /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]


To: jessduntno

Then I’m not sure why you answered ‘no’ to the question: “Is it the lock-maker’s duty to give the government a master key?” and then seemed to retract it.

Perhaps on further reflection... I can understand that. Done it myself.

Would you say now that it is the lock-maker’s duty?


185 posted on 02/19/2016 7:09:14 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson