Sieg Heil 9th Circuit Court!

[alphatarget1]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2013150,00.html

"Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements."

9th circuit court shows their overwhelming liberal wisdom once again. If you don't have a garage, Big Brother can track your whereabouts without a warrant.

 

[Schadenfroh]

If I catch a law enforcement (local or federal) officer trespassing on my property without a warrant and messing with my car, what happens then? Can I press charges for trespassing and/or tampering with my property?

 

[xj0hnx]

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."

What what?

 

[Jaskalas]

What about our government owned mortgages? They do not just own the roads and apparently your driveway, they own the entire house too! Guess it'll take a few years before they realize this.

A government that does everything, owns everything. Human rights be damned.

 

[MotF Bane]

Wooowww. All the judges who supported that decision need to be removed from the bench immediately. I guess they're honest though - their rich buddies get treated differently.

 

[Bateluer]

If I catch a law enforcement (local or federal) officer trespassing on my property without a warrant and messing with my car, what happens then? Can I press charges for trespassing and/or tampering with my property?

Uh, no. You catch a strange, unknown individual trespassing on your property, messing with your car. How far away is your gun?

 

[PottedMeat]

i find a weird electronic device on my property ( that's not from the gas/electric/phone company ), it's mine. then it's off to be dissected or ebay. :awe:

 

[xj0hnx]

i find a weird electronic device on my property ( that's not from the gas/electric/phone company ), it's mine. then it's off to be dissected or ebay. :awe:

I'd stick their tracker on my 90 year old neighbors car, they can watch me go to bingo, and church.

 

[Narmer]

There is no rich bias here. The LEO can just as easily put that tracking device on a car when it's in any public area. Also, getting a warrant isn't that difficult anyway unless the LEOs are lazy...

 

[Patranus]

There is no rich bias here. The LEO can just as easily put that tracking device on a car when it's in any public area. Also, getting a warrant isn't that difficult anyway unless the LEOs are lazy...

You sicken me.

 

[thraashman]

This is a really odd ruling for the 9th circuit. The court that usually upholds the Constitution better than any other court. This time however it's at best perverting the 4th amendment, at worst blatantly wrong about it. And how often is it the conservative judge who is against illegal search and seizure? Considering under the last administration illegal search and seizure was the norm. This is the most topsy turvy ruling I've ever heard.

 

[Patranus]

The court that usually upholds the Constitution better than any other court.

A court that has a 90% reversal rate "usually" upholds the Constitution?

Right......

 

[MotF Bane]

Uh, no. You catch a strange, unknown individual trespassing on your property, messing with your car. How far away is your gun?

And then you shoot a LEO, and if you're lucky, go to jail for murder and spend the rest of your life there, or get some extra chemicals added to your blood... and if you're unlucky, his buddies come out and shoot you. Can't win really against big government's police.

 

[dahunan]

What what?

Reality confuses you huh?

 

[heyheybooboo]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2013150,00.html

"Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements."

9th circuit court shows their overwhelming liberal wisdom once again. If you don't have a garage, Big Brother can track your whereabouts without a warrant.

major Fail

Diarmuid O'Scannlain - Raygun appointee
(wrote the opinion)

Charles Robert Wolle - Raygun appointee

N. Randy Smith - George W. Bush appointee


Instead of trolling, if you had bothered to educate yourself, you would have found exceptional dissent in other Federal districts to the use of GPS by law enforcement from liberal judges.


So ... you pretty much fucked up every which way.




--

 

[EXman]

This is bad for America...

it was in 2007 and it is going to get worse now that we are moving to a more centeralized gov't. Cell phone tracking just better get used to it.

 

[woolfe9999]

A court that has a 90% reversal rate "usually" upholds the Constitution?

Right......

Source that stat please.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200512150016

Incidentally, for people's edification, federal appellate court "reversal rates" all seem unusually high (the article puts it at about 75% average for all courts) because the SCOTUS has discretion as to which cases it hears, and it generally hears cases that it is inclined to reverse but declines to hear cases that it isn't inclined to reverse. The reversal rate stats are a percentage of only cases that the SCOTUS decides to hear. It doesn't include the cases it declines to hear which would nearly all be upheld if they were heard. The vast majority of cases are declined by the SCOTUS, so the reversal rates stats are extremely misleading because the small number of cases not declined are not declined precisely because the court hears them because they intend to reverse them.

Anyway, the article says that the Ninth Circuit was on the national average for reversal, at least for 2002-2005 when it was written.

- wolf

 

[woolfe9999]

major Fail

Diarmuid O'Scannlain - Raygun appointee
(wrote the opinion)

Charles Robert Wolle - Raygun appointee

N. Randy Smith - George W. Bush appointee


Instead of trolling, if you had bothered to educate yourself, you would have found exceptional dissent in other Federal districts to the use of GPS by law enforcement from liberal judges.


So ... you pretty much fucked up every which way.




--

Rumors of the Ninth Circuit's so-called liberality are grossly exaggerated. It has a 47 total judges, and it depends who appointed a given set of judges and which ones are hearing your case, as with any other court. This is basically a Limbaugh et al. talking point.

- wolf

 

[BoomerD]

There's just no pleasing the conservatives...the court is usually accused of being super-liberal...but they make a decision with a decidedly conservative bent...and the righties bitch about that...

 

[Fear No Evil]

There's just no pleasing the conservatives...the court is usually accused of being super-liberal...but they make a decision with a decidedly conservative bent...and the righties bitch about that...

You mean conservatives can actually criticize they own when they made a bad decision?! Too bad the left can't do that.

 

[woolfe9999]

You mean conservatives can actually criticize they own when they made a bad decision?! Too bad the left can't do that.

That logic would apply had the conservatives in this thread not reflexively assumed that the decision was actually a product of liberal judges. Since they believed the people they were criticizing were liberals (based on misguided stereotyping of the court), it can't really be said that they were willing to criticize their own, can it?

- wolf

 

[CallMeJoe]

You mean conservatives can actually criticize they own when they made a bad decision?! Too bad the left can't do that.

You must admit the irony of the OP accusing a Reagan/Bush subset of 9th Circuit of "showing their overwhelming liberal wisdom once again".

 

[xj0hnx]

Reality confuses you huh?

Hahaha, what a child.

 

[BoomerD]

You mean conservatives can actually criticize they own when they made a bad decision?! Too bad the left can't do that.

The folks on the right supported Bush for 8 years...I think that disproves your concept of "actually criticizing their own when they made a bad decision."

I didn't see too many "correct" decisions made by Bush...yet there was no outcry from the right...only from the left.

 

[brandonb]

The day they step onto my property to do this and they are caught, I will be out there with my 9mm ready to confront.