So ends the Constitution.

[David]

A ruling by the US 9th Circus Court of Appeals has declared that police may now track, survey and otherwise investigate anyone within their own property so long as they're outside, without a warrant. The ruling came as a result of a law suet by a man, accused of growing weed, was tracked by police after they, without a warrant, placed a GPS devise under his jeep.

The court did offer 1 exception, the new rule didn't apply to anyone that protected their yards. As 1 dissenting and Constituently minded jude pointed out:

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who dissented from this month's decision refusing to reconsider the case, pointed out whose homes are not open to strangers: rich people's. The court's ruling, he said, means that people who protect their homes with electric gates, fences and security booths have a large protected zone of privacy around their homes. People who cannot afford such barriers have to put up with the government sneaking around at night.
Judge Kozinski is a leading conservative, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, but in his dissent he came across as a raging liberal. "There's been much talk about diversity on the bench, but there's one kind of diversity that doesn't exist," he wrote. "No truly poor people are appointed as federal judges, or as state judges for that matter." The judges in the majority, he charged, were guilty of "cultural elitism."

Opinions getting taxed, religious freedom getting trampled and now the concept of warrants is on the way out. This country is going in a vary dark direction vary fast.

 

[AK_ID]

Maybe we'll get lucky and end up with a Congress with brass ones this time around. Federal judges can be impeached, I believe.

 

[David]

Maybe we'll get lucky and end up with a Congress with brass ones this time around. Federal judges can be impeached, I believe.

And what about congress is Constitutional at this point? They pass laws without following proper proceeder, they ignore ethic violations, they declare organizations people, ect. The president is just as bad, not being able to decide if a state can nullify Federal laws or not and totally ignoring the will of the people. And the military? When's the last time they took civilians seriously, they even insulted the president.

Every element of our gov't is corrupt, democratic institutions are ignored and what should be a federal republic is treated as if an provencal empire.

I might accept it if they just came out and said it but the increasingly authoritarian policies of this gov't while trying to insult everyone's intelligence by claiming to be a democracy is really annoying. And what happens if you openly call for democratization? If you call out the gov't? Ether you're anti-American (if a leftist) or a racist (if a rightist).

 

[obtuseobserver]

good lord.... Civics 101

A ruling by the US 9th Circus Court of Appeals has declared that police may now track, survey and otherwise investigate anyone within their own property so long as they're outside, without a warrant. The ruling came as a result of a law suet by a man, accused of growing weed, was tracked by police after they, without a warrant, placed a GPS devise under his jeep.

The court did offer 1 exception, the new rule didn't apply to anyone that protected their yards. As 1 dissenting and Constituently minded jude pointed out:



Opinions getting taxed, religious freedom getting trampled and now the concept of warrants is on the way out. This country is going in a vary dark direction vary fast.

The 9th is a bench collectively loonier than a shit house rat.

However, this ruling is pretty much a piece of non news.

Police can camp out in front of your home if they want. They can put a ladder on the sidewalk and look in. etc etc etc Your lack of familiarity with the law doesn't mean we're going to hell in a hand basket.

This hardly expands the scope of searching permissible by the police.

And what about congress is Constitutional at this point? They pass laws without following proper proceeder

Procedural rules are just that; procedural rules. The House and Senate get to make their own parliamentary rules. Violating procedural rules is not a constitutional violation.

they declare organizations people, ect.

arrgggg

Congress attempted to ban political speech with the McCain Feingold Act (said corporations couldn't spend their own money on political advertising). The Supreme Court struck the law censoring political speech.

Neither declared corporations to be people. Further, political speech is the highest form of protected speech. Even more, people own corporations. They may use that collective to speak if they wish. Moveon.org is... a corporation. The New York Times is... a corporation. Do you support the notion that they must not endorse candidates? Publish editorials on candidates etc? If not then you're on the side of SCOTUS (and me) with striking the law that was censoring politcal speech.

The president is just as bad, not being able to decide if a state can nullify Federal laws or not

I suspect you're talking about the Administration suing Arizona. Yes, it is very odd that the Feds would sue AZ for doing what the Feds are specifically obliged to do.

However, there is a very well established body of law on the issue. It is called preemption. Check it out at your leisure. In essence the Feds can perempt the field from the states if they wish. However, in the instant case the fact that the Feds often rely on and ask the states for assistence is pretty solid evidence that the feds didn't mean to clear tyhe field. Lastly, even the crazy shit house rats on the 9th have upheld the state's attempts to deal with illegals.

And the military? When's the last time they took civilians seriously, they even insulted the president.

How many relatives do you have in the service? I have many. All of whom served in combat zones. They take their duty seriously and do not deserve your scorn. The officers under McChrystal acted like insubordinate fools and deserved to be drummed out. However, to extrapolate that into par for the course is an overbroad generalization.

Every element of our gov't is corrupt, democratic institutions are ignored and what should be a federal republic is treated as if an provencal empire.

Overbroad generalization. How many people in DC do you know? Which ones are corrupt and in what manner? (I'm happy to accept Waters and Rangle as read).

If you call out the gov't? Ether you're anti-American (if a leftist) or a racist (if a rightist).

I'm knee deep in irony here

 

[David]

The 9th is a bench collectively loonier than a shit house rat.

However, this ruling is pretty much a piece of non news.

Police can camp out in front of your home if they want. They can put a ladder on the sidewalk and look in. etc etc etc Your lack of familiarity with the law doesn't mean we're going to hell in a hand basket.

This hardly expands the scope of searching permissible by the police.

Stakeouts are 1 thing, being able to actually bug your yard, car or even cell phone if you happen to leave it outside without a warrant is something else entirely.

 

[obtuseobserver]

Stakeouts are 1 thing, being able to actually bug your yard, car or even cell phone if you happen to leave it outside without a warrant is something else entirely.

do you have the case citation?

Tracking a vehicle is not a search. That they used a gps device rather than binoculars or with their own eyes while on horseback is legally immaterial.

Just a point of caution from my personal experience... when you read newspaper articles on court decisions the odds of the reporter fucking it up huge are staggeringly high.

Better to read the opinion than some non-lawyers opinion of the opinion

edit: found the denial of petition for rehearing en banc... murky description of facts so far

I give up. Near as I can tell the case turns on the issue of curtilage which is to say whether or not the vehicle was in a place that provided defendant with a reasonablke expectation of privacy. However, I suspect the court bypassed that point and simply declared placing the gps device "not a search." Speculation but reasonable speculation as to what those guys might do.

If you find the case or its citiation please post.

 

[AK_ID]

Surely, Obtuse, you're not accusing reporters of inaccuracy? I was one a long while ago, and never committed an error, at least not one I admitted to.

Ummm, and yeah, cops can follow you outside your home in every state, and without a warrant. In at least one state, they need a warrant to search your vehicle, but they can sure as heck follow you by any means available.

 

[David]

Surely, Obtuse, you're not accusing reporters of inaccuracy? I was one a long while ago, and never committed an error, at least not one I admitted to.

Ummm, and yeah, cops can follow you outside your home in every state, and without a warrant. In at least one state, they need a warrant to search your vehicle, but they can sure as heck follow you by any means available.

The jeep was in his driveway, not some parking lot. That's the issue, you can't expect privacy, according to the court, in your own yard unless it's fenced/walled off.

 

[AK_ID]

I'm no lawyer, but I assume the fellow would have had to post no trespassing signs to have a leg to stand on in court. Elsewise, anyone could walk onto his property, whether cop or Avon saleslady or Mormon missionary.

 

[obtuseobserver]

Surely, Obtuse, you're not accusing reporters of inaccuracy? I was one a long while ago, and never committed an error, at least not one I admitted to.

Ummm, and yeah, cops can follow you outside your home in every state, and without a warrant. In at least one state, they need a warrant to search your vehicle, but they can sure as heck follow you by any means available.

lol - atta boy!

Dude, I would sit with this reporter sometimes after trial days and explain to her what happened and why and the next the paper would have an article describing something that had nothing to do with our case but it used all the right peoples' names

cars: one's expectation of privacy in a car ON A PUBLIC ROADWAY is very low.

Here the car was parked in a driveway. This is usually considered curtilage (little court yard) and one generally has an expectatio of privacy in items within that curtilage. I suspect there are some more facts impacting the curtilage issue or, as I noted, the court skipped right over that and found placing the device was not a search... leaning toward the latter. Then again, they coulda just been really really high.

The jeep was in his driveway, not some parking lot. That's the issue, you can't expect privacy, according to the court, in your own yard unless it's fenced/walled off.

It isn't that simple. They said barriers prevent the police from entering. Those who cannot afford the barriers will than have lower expectations of privacy. But that is hardly relevent. Rich people will always have an easier time secreting themselves from scrutiny and that's not illegal so the fact that others can't afford a home deep in the woods is no reason for changing the law. The simple truth is that it sucks to be poor.

Even if you had a fence, the cops could get that ladder and look into your yard or windows.

There's a case on the books where the police did just that. It gets better... they observed people inside through a tiny open slit at the bottom of a set of blinds not completely covering the window.

 

[David]

lol - atta boy!

Dude, I would sit with this reporter sometimes after trial days and explain to her what happened and why and the next the paper would have an article describing something that had nothing to do with our case but it used all the right peoples' names

cars: one's expectation of privacy in a car ON A PUBLIC ROADWAY is very low.

Here the car was parked in a driveway. This is usually considered curtilage (little court yard) and one generally has an expectatio of privacy in items within that curtilage. I suspect there are some more facts impacting the curtilage issue or, as I noted, the court skipped right over that and found placing the device was not a search... leaning toward the latter. Then again, they coulda just been really really high.

Surprisingly possible and if true vary ironic considering the charge. :giggle:

 

[obtuseobserver]

I'm no lawyer, but I assume the fellow would have had to post no trespassing signs to have a leg to stand on in court. Elsewise, anyone could walk onto his property, whether cop or Avon saleslady or Mormon missionary.

But they are not agents of the state who are bound by search and seizure restrictions

Still, an officer can walk right up to the door and knock and ask to be let in. If the occupant opens it and he sees illegal stuff he has grounds to get a warrant. Under exigent circumstances he needs no warrant and may enter without warrant. There are obviously no exigent circumstances in the present case. However, that the officer can walk up to the door and knock is hardly distinguishable from walking over to the car and looking at it. Whether leaving the deviced constitutes a search I'm thinking is nmore likely what the court hung its hat on. But, we'll need the opinion to find out for sure.

 

[AK_ID]

About that curtilage thing ... it helps when it consists of a mile or so of clay road with a nice creek crossing along the way. Census workers, missionaries and cops tend to avoid tow bills whenever possible.

 

[obtuseobserver]

About that curtilage thing ... it helps when it consists of a mile or so of clay road with a nice creek crossing along the way. Census workers, missionaries and cops tend to avoid tow bills whenever possible.

Absolutely Goddamn Right!


Within the next five years when the student loans are paid off we plan to start building on our farm in WI up in the hills. There is a wood burning stove technique, you're probably familiar more than I, that uses an outdoor stove that burns at very low temperatures. However fire burns at more that 212F. The stove heats water that circulates to keep the house heated just like radiators used to... I grew up with them. Love them. Miss them. We plan to have a variety of energy producing methods including a windmill (not one of those loud ugly turbines but just a nice old fashioned windmill to pump the water from the well. some solar and maybe even steam turbine.... see that stove ;-) ) We'll be hooked up to the grid but we want to be able to function without it. We'll dig down into the grouds to maximize the heating/cooling efficiency and we'll need a pretty damn big cave for my wine cellar. We have over ten feet of black as night dirt. You can throw seeds on the ground and the next day harvest tomatoes. Lots of deer etc etc.... other than creature comforts that we won't want to give up we could be self sufficient... probably put a little hobby farm there too.... a place where we can go and tell the world to fuck off and actually expect it do do so

 

[AK_ID]

I wish you well, Obtuse. I'm gridless here (with the exception of the phone and internet), and manage to survive nicely. I'm also toiletless, but on the bright side I've never had to use a plunger in the outhouse. And speaking of hobby farms, does anyone need any squash? Or eggs? Or melons? I'd give them to neighbors, but they're all offering the same for free. I even checked if the county food bank needs grub, but nope, they aren't accepting produce donations this week because they're overstocked.

 

[obtuseobserver]

I wish you well, Obtuse. I'm gridless here (with the exception of the phone and internet), and manage to survive nicely. I'm also toiletless, but on the bright side I've never had to use a plunger in the outhouse. And speaking of hobby farms, does anyone need any squash? Or eggs? Or melons? I'd give them to neighbors, but they're all offering the same for free. I even checked if the county food bank needs grub, but nope, they aren't accepting produce donations this week because they're overstocked.

lol... we moved our hunting camp south to west central WI now.

back in the day were were so deep in the woods no one had any electricity. anyway... being in camp for the better part of the week you'd kinda wait to do your business.... dropping your drawrs and sitting on a seat in ten below weather isn't any kind of fun

at least the new camp it's usually a good 10 to 20 degrees warmer

oh, the old privy... hillarious... very narrow... the old wide guys had to back into it

 

[AK_ID]

Obviously you Wisconsinonians never learned the fine art of bringing the toilet seat back inside the cabin with you and hanging it on a hook on the wall behind the wood stove. I did that through many Alaska winters, and never regretted the warm seat.

 

[obtuseobserver]

the softies would light a candle in a coffee can (it held the toilet paper so the mice wouldn't eat it) and leave it in there for twent minutes or so... it'd warm that little room up to at least zero

 

[AK_ID]

Yeah, those mice are troublesome. I had a home healthcare lady check on me a couple weeks ago, and wouldn't you know it she asked to use the restroom, and I pointed her down the trail. As it happened, a squirrel or mouse has gotten into the TP and the outhouse looked like a down pillow had exploded in there.

Okay, back on topic. About that pothead who forgot to lock his Jeep in the garage ...

 

[obtuseobserver]

fuck him

............................................

actually, I'm curious now about a decent description of the facts because it may turn on that or it may not be regarded as a search or it could be out of the blue

in any event the result isn't really that much of a broadening of police power - when people here about these cases they get up in arms but they are rare and often not terribly interesting (all the more so because the "victim" is usually a scumbag)

if I had to guess I guess the court said it wasn't a search....

a buddy of mine has some brothers who are cops... they'd take bb guns and shoot holes into tail lights of parked suspect cars to create a reason to pull the car over. Some cops are sneaky fuckers. Its a funny story in the abstract but pretty fucking disturbing in the reality.