|
The Supreme Court Ruled Tuesday....
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Dj Skez |
Watch the video, it will explain about the ruling made today. This is very serious and a lot of Americans are going to feel like their privacy is being violated in many ways. What are your thoughts? |
|
|
| Spacey Orange |
| Bad news indeed. Under this ruling, as i understand it, cops can pretty much barge into any place, find something illegal, and then seek approval of a co-tenant to justify the initial illegal warrantless search. Previously, any evidence could have been excludable. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| so you don't understand it then. |
|
|
| Psyshell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spacey Orange
Bad news indeed. Under this ruling, as i understand it, cops can pretty much barge into any place, find something illegal, and then seek approval of a co-tenant to justify the initial illegal warrantless search. Previously, any evidence could have been excludable. |
Where are you getting that from? AFAIK the law in most countries is that in multi person dwellings the right to reject people entering trumps a person's right to allow them in so any person in a share household can veto anyone coming in. It appears they've changed that law to make an exception for police so that now if any one person allows them in they're allowed in.
I don't really understand the part about an occupant objecting to a search if they're not at home though. Doesn't that mean the cops can search any house that isn't guarded by occupants 24/7? |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| You'd better start hiding your stash more thoroughly. |
|
|
| Lagrangian |
I have a bigger problem with Judicial Activism. Moreover, Warrantless searches without a modicum of evidence, much less suspicion of wrongdoing IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The duties of the National Security Agency is within the statutory boundaries of NATIONAL SECURITY, therefore CONSTITUTIONAL.
http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/127/february14/Article_9562.php |
|
|
| Lagrangian |
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem." - Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...itutional-judge
|
|
|
|
|
