[copycat]

Look, it is very clever of you to demand that others outline in detail their supposition that the $10K reporting requirement violates the Fourth. The answer to this is somewhat complex, and you will be free to attack it at many points, but you will not change my mind.

The purpose of the 4th is to insure unreasonable searches and seizures. Let me start with this...

"...no warrants shall issue, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by oath or affirmation, a nd particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The purpose of the 4th is to prevent the govt from searching me without probable cause. IOW, it must have a SPECIFIC cause and swear so before a magistrate before it may search me. This requirement does NOT state a specific probable cause to examine my private transactions.

IMHO, this activity is no different than an LEO coming into my home and looking through my checkbook.

[VA Advogado]

IMHO, this activity is no different than an LEO coming into my home and looking through my checkbook.

Retailers are not LEOS. The 4th amendment only applies to government. Its like crying for your first amendment protections here if a moderator zaps one of your posts. The constitution is irrelevant until the government gets involved.

[JD86]

The purpose of the 4th is to insure unreasonable searches and seizures.

You give me too much credit, I am not that clever. And I think you mean to "insure against, not insure" searches and seizures...:)

However, I can read the law and I can read the 4th Amendment and there is no correlation. This is not a new law.
This is not a SEARCH and this is not a SEIZURE.

To borrow a phrase from another poster...if you are that paranoid, write a check or quit selling drugs.