YaHooka Forums  

Go Back   YaHooka Forums > The Chronic Colloquials > Politics And Current Affairs
Home FAQ Social Groups Links Mark Forums Read

Politics And Current Affairs Discussion on politics, current affairs and law. Do something today to make a difference.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 06-22-2016, 12:26 PM   #1 (permalink)
DdC
Decade Yahookan
 
DdC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Santa Cruz,CA,USA
Posts: 2,570
Blog Entries: 5
Thanks: 175
Thanked 1,080 Times in 635 Posts
Supreme Court in another attack on the 4th Amendment

In a 5-3 decision in Utah v. Strieff.

Police State Groupies
John G. Roberts Jr., Anthony M. Kennedy, Stephen G. Breyer, Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined majority opinion of Cliarence Thomas
Americans
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Elena Kagan

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that evidence found by police officers after illegal stops may be used in court if the officers conducted their searches after learning that the defendants had outstanding arrest warrants. – New York Times […]

The case, Utah v. Strieff, No. 14-1373, arose from police surveillance of a house in South Salt Lake based on an anonymous tip of “narcotics activity” there. A police officer, Douglas Fackrell, stopped Edward Strieff after he had left the house based on what the state later conceded were insufficient grounds, making the stop unlawful.

Officer Fackrell then ran a check and discovered a warrant for a minor traffic violation. He arrested Mr. Strieff, searched him and found a baggie containing methamphetamines and drug paraphernalia. The question for the justices was whether the drugs must be suppressed given the unlawful stop or whether they could be used as evidence given the arrest warrant.

“Officer Fackrell was at most negligent,” Justice Thomas wrote, adding that “there is no evidence that Officer Fackrell’s illegal stop reflected flagrantly unlawful police misconduct.”

Supreme Court in another attack on the 4th Amendment dwr

Sonia Sotomayor’s Atomic Bomb of a Dissent Slamming Racial Profiling and Mass Imprisonment

Sonia Sotomayor’s devastating defense of civil liberties

“Do not be soothed by the opinion’s technical language,” wrote Sotomayor. “This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants — even if you are doing nothing wrong.”

Who needs dogs to sniff out pot when we have Supreme Court Justices who trample on the 4th Amendment to do it for them.

Supreme Court Says Police May Use Evidence Found After Illegal Stops

Justice Thomas:
the whole line of “commerce clause” cases granted too much power to the federal government

“This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants—even if you are doing nothing wrong,” Sotomayor writes, in a dissent joined in part by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. “If the officer discovers a warrant for a fine you forgot to pay, courts will now excuse his illegal stop and will admit into evidence anything he happens to find by searching you after arresting you on the warrant.” […]

“By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time. It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged.”

“We must not pretend that the countless people who are routinely targeted by police are “isolated.” They are the canaries in the coal mine whose deaths, civil and literal, warn us that no one can breathe in this atmosphere. They are the ones who recognize that unlawful police stops corrode all our civil liberties and threaten all our lives. Until their voices matter too, our justice system will continue to be anything but.”

The chief principle of a well-regulated police state is this:

That each citizen shall be at all times and places … recognized as this or that particular person. No one must remain unknown to the police. This can be attained with certainty only in the following manner: Each one must always carry a pass with him, signed by his immediate government official, in which his person is accurately described. There must be no exception to this rule.

Johann G. Fichte, (1796—1879), THE SCIENCE OF RIGHTS.
DdC is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DdC For This Useful Post:
kamikazi89 (06-23-2016), stoneric (06-22-2016)
Old 06-22-2016, 01:43 PM   #2 (permalink)
bougeman
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,435
Thanks: 5,379
Thanked 6,506 Times in 3,666 Posts
Justice Thomas remains a douche even after his fat ass mentor went off to fat ass heaven.
stoneric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2016, 06:17 AM   #3 (permalink)
devils advocate
 
kamikazi89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,803
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 2,989
Thanked 1,871 Times in 1,252 Posts
...and in other news: House Democrats are staging protests for the purpose of legislating away due process
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis D. View Post
we need to make the wheels out of pizza.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Governor View Post
Time Bandits!







What's wrong with you people?
katie west is the best


Trump is a pussy


kamikazi89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design