Now The Fourth Amendment Under Attack
Posted 28 March 2004 - 05:13 PM
Here is the link: http://www.theneworl...483/detail.html
In the event that any of you forgot, The Fourth Amendment states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
As George Washington once wrote, "Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
Posted 28 March 2004 - 06:08 PM
P.S. What is truly alarming, is that this is happening at all in America!!! It definately illustrates a trend toward extremism, on the part of our governments and courts!!
Posted 28 March 2004 - 06:13 PM
THERE ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CHECK IN PLACE TO KEEP THE POLICE INLINE!! "The law won't be abused" Is not going to cut it... I have this sneaky feeling that a few cops in that town are going to end up dead because of that law.
Posted 28 March 2004 - 06:36 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 07:52 PM
Thanks for the heads-up. Your concern about trashing the Constitution is well-justified.
I'm concerned about you automatically sticking the "liberal" tag on the court, with the implication that the "conservatives" are some salvation. I wish it were so! Of the 19 judges listed on the 5th's biography page (http://www.lb5.uscou...io/judgebio.htm), 2 were appointed by Ford, 3 by Carter, SEVEN by Reagan, 4 by Bush the First, and 3 by Slick Willy.
Now, counting Ford, Reagan, and Bush I as conservative, they appointed 13 of 19 judges on the 5th Circuit - a pretty clear majority.
I get real concerned when labels start interfering with the issues. Fact is, the Constitution is under attack; whether the attackers are "liberals" or "conservatives" is not the point. And the best tool the attackers have is to try to cloud the issue of what's Constitutional by throwing in political devisiveness.
I don't think the "Patriotic Act" would be considered very liberal, but to me is about the scariest thing to come down the pike in quite a while as far as endangering the Constitution. And it's only the first step. Just wait till "Patriot II" hits the streets.
It ain't about being liberal or being conservative. It's about being Constitutional. I'll back whoever is willing to stand up to that. Problem is, that makes for pretty slim pickin's these days.
I say fire 'em ALL!
Posted 28 March 2004 - 07:58 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 08:03 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 08:39 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 08:54 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 08:59 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 09:01 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 11:23 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 11:37 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 11:42 PM
Posted 28 March 2004 - 11:56 PM
P.S. Also, many thanks to Nick and Frank, for this excellent board. People of like mind, and will, can be informed, entertained, communicated with, and organized, etc.
Posted 29 March 2004 - 12:31 AM
Posted 29 March 2004 - 07:31 AM
First, the Fifth Circuit only encompasses Texas, Lousianna, and Mississippi. The opinion is only binding law in those three states. Other circuits may look to the 5th Circuit opinion for guidance, but they are not bound to follow it.
Second, the was not simply an instance of the government entering a house and searching. The issue was whether the police after being allowed inside, had authority to make a "protective sweep" of the master bedroom of the house where the three rifles were found in plain view. (the resident, Mr. Gould, who occupied that bedroom was a convicted felon and could not legally possess a firearm under federal law). I think this opinion really supports the theory "bad facts make bad law". Read the first couple paragraphs of the opinion to find out why the police were at Mr. Gould's residence in the first place.
While I don't necessarily agree with the erosion of fourth amendment rights caused by this case, it is not as bad as it could be. We will have to wait for Patriot II for that.
The opinion is alarming, but hopefully will be reviewed by the US Supreme Court. It was a March 26, 2004 published opinion by an en banc panel of the 5th Circuit (all of the judges):
United States of America v. Kelly Donald Gould
This opinion was published two days after a 3 judge panel of the 5th circuit found the district court judge was proper in suppressing the search.
I haven't had time to read the entire 64 page opinion yet, I may revise this post when I do.
Until then, be careful what you post, you never know who in the government is watching you . . .