Our freedoms are slowly being usurped. The Supreme Court is claiming that law enforcement officers may enter your home if they suspect you are flushing evidence down the toilet.
Mark Sherman reports, via Macon.com:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court isn’t given to offering advice to people who are breaking the law, even in a minor way. But some justices on Wednesday effectively told those who might be sitting at home smoking pot when the police come knocking: Do not flush the toilet.
Because if officers smell the pot from the outside, think the occupants are trying to get rid of it and burst in without a search warrant to prevent evidence from being destroyed, some justices indicated they would approve.
The discussion arose during the court’s consideration of a case about when the police can enter a home without a search warrant, which the Constitution normally requires.
It’s just the 4th Amendment. Why should the Supreme Court hold up our rights given to us under the 4th Amendment? The courts are giving law enforcement officers powers that were never intended.
There are exceptions, and the state of Kentucky argued that its treatment of Hollis King should be one such exception.
The issue for the justices is whether police action – in this case, a knock on a door – that triggers a reaction on the other side – like noise that suggests destruction of evidence - should justify the warrantless entry.
New Justice Elena Kagan said she worries the court could make it too easy for police to avoid the time and effort of getting warrant “in a very wide variety of cases.” She said that view would require only that officers said they smelled “pot, we heard noise.”
Yet several justices suggested that as long as the police reasonably suspect something illegal is going on and do not use deception or illegal means to gain entry, the search probably doesn’t violate the Constitution.
Entering someone’s home without a warrant is illegal, according to the 4th Amendment. I would like to point out that if anyone can hear your toilet flush while outside your home, you must have a huge toilet. Hearing this noise will allow a Police officer to violate your 4th amendment right and enter your home without a search warrant.
I wonder why the Founding Fathers put this in the U.S. Constitution?
‘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.’
Read Full Post »
Does the T.S.A. know what the 4th Amendment is?
From molesting passengers to molesting passenger’s credit cards and personal documents. Sounds like illegal search and seizure to me and that is a blatant violation of our 4th amendment rights.
Read Full Post »
More and more of our rights are being taken away by judicial activists.
The California Supreme Court allowed police Monday to search arrestees’ cell phones without a warrant, saying defendants lose their privacy rights for any items they’re carrying when taken into custody.
Under U.S. Supreme Court precedents, “this loss of privacy allows police not only to seize anything of importance they find on the arrestee’s body … but also to open and examine what they find,” the state court said in a 5-2 ruling.
The majority, led by Justice Ming Chin, relied on decisions in the 1970s by the nation’s high court upholding searches of cigarette packages and clothing that officers seized during an arrest and examined later without seeking a warrant from a judge.
Why is the courts against the 4th Amendment?
The dissenting justices said those rulings shouldn’t be extended to modern cell phones that can store huge amounts of data.
Monday’s decision allows police “to rummage at leisure through the wealth of personal and business information that can be carried on a mobile phone or handheld computer merely because the device was taken from an arrestee’s person,” said Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, joined in dissent by Justice Carlos Moreno.
They argued that police should obtain a warrant – by convincing a judge that they will probably find incriminating evidence – before searching a cell phone.
The issue has divided other courts. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston of San Francisco ruled in May 2007 that police had violated drug defendants’ rights by searching their cell phones after their arrests. The Ohio Supreme Court reached a similar conclusion in a December 2009 ruling in which the state unsuccessfully sought U.S. Supreme Court review.
The Ohio-California split could prompt the nation’s high court to take up the issue, said Deputy Attorney General Victoria Wilson, who represented the prosecution in Monday’s case.
Read Full Post »
Posted in Political Issues, tagged 4th Amendment, 4th Amendment rights, airport security, Americans, enhanced patdowns, hijacking, hijacking airplanes, illegal search and seizure, profiling, T.S.A., terrorists, Transportation Security Administration on November 21, 2010 |
Leave a Comment »
The terrorist have officially won. Instead of profiling those that are known to hijack planes, our government wants to molest American flyers and children. How many American children have carried out the act of hijacking a plane? As a matter of fact, how many Americans have hijacked a plane? The answer is zero. So why is this being done. It’s because politicians are chicken shit and will not use profiling because they do not want to offend anyone other than an American citizen.
The T.S.A. should target those who fit the profile. Stop molesting Americans and their children. This is a violation of our 4th Amendment Rights.
“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.”
Read Full Post »