I think most of the restrictive “two party consent” wiretap laws only hold up because they haven’t been challenged to a high enough court yet.
Usually they are used by the state as grounds for arrest (thereby getting their hands on any recorded evidence), but the cases are subsequently dropped by prosecutors before higher courts have a chance to strike down the law. Illinois made the mistake of trying to actually prosecute under it’s similar two party consent law a few years ago and the state Supreme Court struck it down. I don’t think any of these laws have ever even made it to the federal courts or Supreme courts yet.
The devil is in the quagmire of the legal system that allows a judge to do whatever his liberal mind can come up with. Some of those minds are fried from alcoholism or drug addiction.
True and another reason the dems are so butt hurt about not getting a lib judge installed on the supreme court but their own precedent bit them with the Joe Biden Rule dictating no nominations during a Presidential election year in 1992 (I think).
There’s no guarantee at all that Gorsuch will lean right. As far as I can tell; he’s a centrist which I’m okay with. I wish they all went strictly by the constitution and not “feelings” or what they think the founders meant in the current year as living document. Someone checked for a pulse and guess what; no life there. ;) If all SC judges were centrist we could expect fair and impartial rulings but everyone knows Kagan and Sotomayor are not centrist but instead lean hard left.