Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-19-2011, 12:26 PM
 
Location: SC
9,101 posts, read 16,423,688 times
Reputation: 3620

Advertisements

Great! How nice to know that for no reason whatsoever and without a warrant, police can break down your door and enter your home. Chalk it up to another of numerous reason to re-elect OBAMA (NOT)!

Supreme Court Erodes 4th Amendment Protections- Eases Ability For Police To Enter Your Home Without Warrant - Rick Ungar - The Policy Page - Forbes

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20110516/ts_csm/384310 (broken link)

I believe this is happening in Indiana right now yet there is nothing about it on the Indiana threads. You'd think it would be the utmost critical issue on everyone's mind!

Last edited by emilybh; 05-19-2011 at 12:40 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-19-2011, 12:33 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,856,313 times
Reputation: 12828
Tyranny now walks about in the open without shame.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Norman, OK
3,478 posts, read 7,241,508 times
Reputation: 1201
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
Great! How nice to know that for no reason whatsoever and without a warrent, police can break down your door and enter your home. Chalk it up to another of numerous reason to re-elect OBAMA (NOT)!
I am not sure what Obama has to do with this, given the following statement from the article:

"While the decision is not, in and of itself, unexpected given the conservative leanings of the Court, the fact that all but Justice Ginsberg went along with the ruling did come as something of a surprise to legal experts."

If anything, according to the logic of the article, having more liberal-appointed judges on the panel might have upheld the 4th Amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 12:45 PM
 
Location: SC
9,101 posts, read 16,423,688 times
Reputation: 3620
Quote:
Originally Posted by wxjay View Post
I am not sure what Obama has to do with this, given the following statement from the article:

"While the decision is not, in and of itself, unexpected given the conservative leanings of the Court, the fact that all but Justice Ginsberg went along with the ruling did come as something of a surprise to legal experts."

If anything, according to the logic of the article, having more liberal-appointed judges on the panel might have upheld the 4th Amendment.
Wrong! Liberal Judges are the ones that think the Constitution is "outdated" and that people are too stupid too irresponsible to run their own lives and need the government to run their lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 12:45 PM
 
8,392 posts, read 7,354,917 times
Reputation: 8707
Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion on the case.

Alito was nominated by GW Bush and confirmed by a Republican majority senate in 2005. He is also described as a conservative with a libertarian streak.

So...don't vote for Obama in 2012 so he can't nominate more Supreme Court justices like Alito?

Anyone else seeing the logical disconnect here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Norman, OK
3,478 posts, read 7,241,508 times
Reputation: 1201
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
Wrong! Liberal Judges are the ones that think the Constitution is "outdated" and that people are too stupid too irresponsible to run their own lives and need the government to run their lives.
Excuse me? Who wrote the majority opinion and wrote the dissenting opinion and what sides of the political spectrum are they on? And, there is little debate that the Supreme Court leans conservative right now.

Sorry. You are out of gas on this one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 01:03 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh View Post
Wrong! Liberal Judges are the ones that think the Constitution is "outdated" and that people are too stupid too irresponsible to run their own lives and need the government to run their lives.
But it wasn't liberal judges who made this ruling. It was conservative judges, appointed by conservative Presidents, wasn't it? Or is your argument that Chief Justice Roberts and his cohorts are liberals, all appointed by liberal presidents?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Silver Springs, FL
23,410 posts, read 36,915,433 times
Reputation: 15560
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion on the case.

Alito was nominated by GW Bush and confirmed by a Republican majority senate in 2005. He is also described as a conservative with a libertarian streak.

So...don't vote for Obama in 2012 so he can't nominate more Supreme Court justices like Alito?

Anyone else seeing the logical disconnect here?
Yes, its lit up like a runway at JFK at midnight, too bad the OP and her ilk still cant see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 01:21 PM
 
13,673 posts, read 8,978,585 times
Reputation: 10386
Here is a link to the actual Court decision.

http://docs.justia.com/cases/supreme...72/opinion.pdf

Nothing like reading the actual decision.

Let us see how many read it, and can identify 1) the actual issue before the Court, and 2) the resolution of said issue.

Like many Supreme Court decisions, this one has a lot of dictum.

Also, link to the dissent:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/supreme...72/dissent.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2011, 01:33 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
The crux of the case is exigent circumstances. The police were in pursuit of someone who evaded them in an apartment building. The police had no way of knowing into which apartment the person they were pursuing had entered. From one apartment there was an aroma of pot. The police could have gotten a warrant to enter the apartment based on that. But instead they knocked on the door and identified themselves as police. From inside they heard movement, but did not get a response. Assuming that the evidence of drug use was being destroyed, the police forced their way into the apartment where they found both cocaine and marijuana. The Kentucky Supreme Court determined that exigent circumstances did not merit the police breaking down the door. The fact that sounds were heard behind the door after the police knocked and identified themselves did not provide such urgency that the people in the apartment deserved to have their 4th Amendment rights violated. The Supreme Court's position, which I think is ludicrous, is that the people in the apartment should have been so knowledgeable about their Constitutional rights that they should have responded to the police officers' knock by telling the police officers that they were invoking their 4th Amendment rights and that the police should leave them alone. If they had done that, according to Alito, then the police would have had no recourse but to go to a judge to ask for a warrant. Instead, they made sounds like an occupant trying to clean up a messy apartment, thereby creating exigent circumstances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:14 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top