Derision, A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy

letpdf.xyz
Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Derision, A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Derision, A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy book. Happy reading Derision, A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Derision, A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Derision, A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy Pocket Guide.

http://dbctech.in/17-buy-chloroquine-phosphate.php Baxter put his hands in the air. Nevertheless, the police unleashed a K-9 unit, which bit Baxter under his armpit. Baxter sued the officers for excessive force, but in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that, whether or not Baxter's rights were violated, the officers were immune from his lawsuit. It wasn't clearly established, the court said, that using a police dog to apprehend him while his hands were raised was unconstitutional.

The decision hinged on a notorious doctrine, known as "qualified immunity," that protects police from lawsuits when reasonable officers wouldn't know they were committing a constitutional violation. Now the American Civil Liberties Union ACLU is asking the Supreme Court to reconsider not just Baxter's case but the entire doctrine of qualified immunity, which has faced a growing bipartisan chorus of criticism. Arizona could soon be one of the first states to maintain a massive statewide DNA database.

Under Senate Bill , which Sen. David Livingston, R-Peoria, introduced, DNA must be collected from anyone who has to be fingerprinted by the state for a job, to volunteer in certain positions or for a myriad of other reasons. They call it the "magic box. Actually, if the government gets its hands on your DNA, they as good as have you in their clutches. Police have gradually expanded the practice's reach, from checking DNA collected against existing samples of convicted criminals to checking them against samples in the databases of genealogy web sites and genetic-testing companies like 23andMe and Ancestry.

California allows the collection and preservation of DNA samples from anyone who is arrested, even if they're not charged with a crime. It seems the number of perplexing regulatory questions relating to self-driving cars are piling up as fast as automakers can create workable prototypes. So will we have it all settled by the time these autonomous vehicles are "street-ready?

Incrementalism: Scientists call for lowering drunk driving threshold. Most women would need to draw the line at two drinks, and men at two or three if states follow a blueprint by a prestigious scientific panel for eliminating the "entirely preventable" 10, alcohol-impaired driving deaths in the United States each year.

The Editor says Don't Register Anything. Colorado marijuana patients have been surprised during traffic stops to discover that cops knew they were registered users. Cops are supposed to have access to the registry only under limited circumstances, but the data has obviously been shared more widely than many people envisioned.

What Country Is This? The Fourth Amendment was designed to stand between us and arbitrary governmental authority. For all practical purposes, that shield has been shattered, leaving our liberty and personal integrity subject to the whim of every cop on the beat, trooper on the highway and jail official. The framers would be appalled. How California police are tracking your biometric data in the field. EFF and MuckRock teamed up in August to reveal how state and local law enforcement agencies are using mobile biometric technology in the field by filing public records requests around the country.

With the help of members of the public who nominated jurisdictions for investigation, we have now obtained thousands of pages of documents from more than 30 agencies. Nine of the agencies have responded to our requests with documents, while many more claimed they didn't have any records. Of those that did respond, most employed a digital fingerprinting device.

Facial recognition has also been widely embraced among agencies in San Diego County, with Santa Clara County law enforcement agencies close behind. Katelyn Ebner is one such victim who spent a night in jail and months fighting DUI charges, all because of what one attorney accurately calls police "guesswork. You heard right.

PERSONAL LIBERTY

That means no breathalyzer or blood test. Qualified immunity is the concept that allows overreaching and abusive government employees and officials to stay one step ahead of accountability. At issue in this case isn't whether these shootings by cop will continue in the future. They will, and this case just makes that more likely, but judges should not be deciding cases based on their social import. In other words, there is an objective standard against which their actions should be judged in this particular case, and that doesn't change one iota based on what may or may not happen in the future.

Cops given pass for shooting innocent man in his own apartment. There was no warrant and no reason to suspect the apartment resident in Lake County, Florida, of a crime. But police officers who said they were investigating a speeding motorcyclist, to which the man had no links, pounded on the door at in the morning.

When Andrew Scott, 26, answered the door, carrying a weapon for defense because of the vigorous knocking at an unlikely hour, an officer shot and killed him. Now, the 11th U. Circuit Court of Appeals has given the officer a pass for the killing, prompting an outraged dissent from four justices on the panel. In addition, In addition, the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department's biometrics system includes tattoo recognition, while the Orange County Sheriff's Department is also investigating iris recognition.

Local law enforcement had sought social media analytic technology capable of scouring the internet for potential threats, including the ability to monitor platforms including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube in real time for any data of interest to investigators, according to an Oct. A Chicago company has marketed a tool using text, photos and videos gleaned from major social media companies to aid law enforcement surveillance of protesters, civil liberties activists say.

The company, called Geofeedia, used data from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, as well as nine other social media networks, to let users search for social media content in a specific location, as opposed to searching by words or hashtags that would be less likely to reveal an exact location. The program will inform police of the physical location from which you made your last social media post.

It will provide the content of your posts, too. Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook are all included in the surveillance sweep, and all the updates posted to any one of these popular services will be uploaded to one single database available all day, every day, to police. Geofeedia's pamphlet promoting the service touts their intelligence platform's ability to provide "targeted surveillance" and "perpetual monitoring" of social media posts. Literature produced by Geofeedia also promotes its software's ability to track large crowds, including "protests," athletic events, and natural disasters.

Police use TEN different types of checkpoints, with more on the way. Police and the Border Patrol are using 'general crime control checkpoints' to harass and detain motorists across the country. So why are police and the Border Patrol stopping innocent motorists? Police forces across the United States are stockpiling massive databases with personal information from millions of Americans who crossed paths with officers but were not charged with a crime. A person can end up in one of these databases by doing nothing more than sitting on a public park bench or chatting with an officer on the street.

What began as a method for linking suspicious behavior to crime has morphed into a practice that threatens to turn local police departments into miniature versions of the National Security Agency. In the process, critics contend, police risk trampling constitutional rights, tarnishing innocent people and further eroding public trust. News that the city of Baltimore has been under surreptitious, mass-scale camera surveillance will have ramifications across the criminal justice world.

When it comes to constitutional criminal procedure, privacy, and the Fourth Amendment, it's time to get ready for the concept of "pre-search. The system records visible activity across an area as wide as thirty square miles for as much as ten hours at a time. Police can use it to work backward from an event, watching the comings and goings of people and cars to develop leads about who was involved. From people in their backyards to anyone going from home to work, to the psychologist's or marriage counselor's office, to meetings with lawyers or advocacy groups, and to public protests.

Supreme Court OKs warrant-less breathalyzer tests in drunk driving arrests. The consolidated cases, referred to as Birchfield v. North Dakota , came from three separate drunk driving arrests where the men arrested were prosecuted or threatened with prosecution for refusing a blood or breath test. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution clearly states that "No person [ Supreme Court gives police more power to stop and question people.

The court, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, said that because the man had an outstanding arrest warrant for a traffic violation, the illegal stop could be ignored.

Related Stories

Opposing viewpoint: The Fourth Amendment wasn't created to protect the guilty. The Libertarians are up in arms over yet another Supreme Court decision this week which involves the question of when police are allowed to use evidence of a crime in the prosecution of a suspect. In a five to three ruling which crossed the normal ideological battle lines of the SCOTUS justices, the court found in the case of Utah v. Strieff that evidence of a crime discovered during a traffic stop could be used if the suspect has an outstanding warrant for an unrelated offense.

Oklahoma governor suspends use of controversial card readers. Oklahoma state police have suspended a program that uses scanner technology to detect counterfeit credit cards amid growing concerns that it could allow cops to empty the bank accounts of law-abiding citizens.

The decision was ordered by Gov. Mary Fallin hours after FoxNews. Pot breathalyzers and saliva tests: Police ask motorists to "volunteer" to submit to drug tests. Just when you think you've seen it all, police state America invents a new way to destroy our rights. Two years have passed since, police were forced to stop using 'voluntary' DNA checkpoints across the country.

Colorado troopers have been using five different untested drug saliva test kits on suspected drugged drivers. There are currently only a handful of manufacturers making saliva test kits and the state police are pilot-testing them all on motorists. People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law.

Drone owners have been warned to leave their aircraft at home during the Super Bowl. I suppose they've got to draw the line somewhere, but Why not miles? Most battery-powered drones are barely able to lift a TV camera. How much damage could such a device possibly do? Does that not deprive the drone's owner of his property without due process?

The new way police are surveilling you: Calculating your threat 'score'. As a national debate has played out over mass surveillance by the National Security Agency, a new generation of technology such as the Beware software being used in Fresno has given local law enforcement officers unprecedented power to peer into the lives of citizens. Police officials say such tools can provide critical information that can help uncover terrorists or thwart mass shootings, ensure the safety of officers and the public, find suspects, and crack open cases. Supreme Court says police officers can be ignorant about the law, but you and I can't.

The protests sweeping across the country in the wake of Ferguson, Mo. If that doesn't make much sense, you've gotten a taste of how the Supreme Court works. Gun owners fear Maryland cops target them for traffic stops. The officers were searching for Mr. Filippidis' Florida-licensed, palm-size Kel-Tec. Briefly, the facts in Heien v. North Carolina are that a North Carolina police officer pulled over Nicholas Heien because one of his car's brake lights was out. The state's law requires only one light to be working, so the stop was based on a mistake of law. After Heien was pulled over, he gave consent for the officer to search his car.

The officer found cocaine in the car, then placed Heien under arrest. Heien later claimed the initial stop was not legal under the Fourth Amendment of the U. The Supreme Court ruled that the mistake for the initial stop, which was a seizure under the Fourth Amendment, was reasonable and therefore lawful. Residents criticize roadblocks in search for Pennsylvania ambush suspect. Last week, troopers issued a "shelter-in-place" order that kept some residents from leaving their houses for more than a day; those who weren't already at home could not go back.

Residents contend the directive left elderly relatives unattended and pets unfed, and resulted in lost wages for workers who couldn't leave their houses. Suspect in Pennsylvania trooper slaying planned for months, police say. He planned his attack and retreat. However, we believe we are closing in on him. If the suspect at large is no danger "to anyone other than law enforcement," why are the neighborhood residents being kept out of their own homes?

Nor can a Police State be constructed in America without your submission and cooperation. In fact, some of you become angry with people like me when we try to warn the American people about it. This shows that you have already become acclimated and accepting of it. Justice Department. America's expanding police state. Keep in mind, people in the political class constantly reveal their contempt for regular citizens.

That contempt is the inevitable result of a group of people who have convinced themselves that big government is necessary because the little people can't control their own lives. These same politicians and bureaucrats then begin to see themselves a genuinely better than everyone else. After all, if they were just like us, then they'd be part of the rabble, and they can't have that. The solution to their dilemma is a police state. Supreme Court: Pennsylvania cops no longer need a warrant to search citizens' vehicles.

Pennsylvania police officers no longer need a warrant to search a citizen's vehicle, according to a recent state Supreme Court opinion. Previously, citizens could refuse an officer's request to search a vehicle. The ruling, passed on a vote, was made in regard to an appeal from a vehicle stop in Philadelphia.

Checkpoint Charlie: Police halt Montgomery County commuters on I to hunt for bank robbery suspects. A group of officers made its way to his car and other cars around him. Pop the trunk! Horror: Police force man to undergo invasive anal operation. When New Mexico police stopped a local driver for committing a minor moving violation, they decided to check whether he was carrying drugs in his anus.

No drugs were found. The Drift toward Despotism. David Eckert was pulled over by police in Deming, N. He was asked to step out of the vehicle, and waited on the sidewalk. Officers decided that they didn't like the tight clench of his buttocks, a subject on which New Mexico's constabulary is apparently expert, and determined that it was because he had illegal drugs secreted therein. Supreme Court appears to support a warrantless police search. Justices appeared to agree with attorneys for the Los Angeles Police Department, who defended the search as legal because the gang member, Walter Fernandez, was not present and his girlfriend gave police permission to enter their home.

City leaders have argued that Oakland needs a massive surveillance system to combat violent crime, but internal documents reveal that city staffers are also focused on tracking political protesters. The New York Police Department has secretly labeled entire mosques as terrorist organizations, a designation that allows police to use informants to record sermons and spy on imams, often without specific evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Designating an entire mosque as a terrorism enterprise means that anyone who attends prayer services there is a potential subject of an investigation and fair game for surveillance.

What's the difference between that and profiling? And where are the "separation of church and state" people now? Turning public schools into forts. Indeed, the majority of schools today have adopted an all-or-nothing lockdown mindset that leaves little room for freedom, individuality or due process. A narrowly divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that police can collect DNA from people arrested but not yet convicted of serious crimes, a tool that more than half the states already use to help crack unsolved crimes. The case, described by Justice Samuel Alito as "the most important criminal procedure case that this court has heard in decades," represented a classic test between modern crime-fighting technology and centuries-old privacy rights.

Law enforcement applaud ruling on DNA swabbing. The Supreme Court has ruled that is now legal for law enforcement to take the DNA of people arrested, even though they have not yet been convicted of a crime. The decision was a big victory to police and victim rights groups in the fight over how and when your DNA can be used, with the justices being nearly split down the middle.

Court: Police can take DNA swabs from arrestees. King, that anyone arrested for a "serious crime" can have his or her DNA taken without any suspicion, is a landmark because it represents a major step toward a "Gattaca" world. This means that evidence of a crime can be collected without any particular suspicion, avoiding the pesky requirement of a warrant that the Founding Fathers thought would give us liberty and privacy. A few days later Off-duty cops collect DNA samples at Alabama roadblocks.

Off-duty cops in two counties in Alabama spent the weekend collecting saliva and blood samples from drivers at roadblocks. According to Lt. Freddie Turrentine with the St. Clair County Sheriff's Department, drivers were asked to voluntarily offer samples of their saliva and blood for a study being conducted by the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation. Why were roadblocks in St.

Clair and Bibb counties asking for blood and DNA samples this weekend? However, the samples were voluntary and motorists were paid for them as part of a study, they said. Freddie Turrentine of the St. Clair County Sheriff's Department, it isn't the first time such roadblocks have occurred in the area. The samples were voluntary , huh? How voluntary is it when the police stop your car on an Alabama highway and demand evidence? I suspect you'll be detained until the cops get what they want. Slowly, and largely under the radar, a growing number of local law enforcement agencies across the country have moved into what had previously been the domain of the F.

Another instance, in another state: Pa. Motorist checkpoint in Reading draws questions. He said federal and local tax dollars were being used to stop innocent people without probable cause, and allow a private company to hire uniformed police to force citizens to listen to their questions. He said he wasn't told what the swab was for, but added, "Clearly it was for DNA. Police presence at traffic stop troubling. Appearance is everything. So when a police car's lights are flashing along the side of a city street lined with cones, and someone forces motorists into a parking lot that contains uniformed city police, forgive the motorists for believing police are operating that checkpoint.

And when people with no ID tell motorists they want to ask about their driving habits but also ask for a mouth swab, forgive the motorists for believing they want a DNA sample without a warrant. And when the same people say the questions and the swab are voluntary but don't take no for an answer, forgive the motorists for thinking it's not really voluntary after all. Red flags raised after local drivers asked for DNA samples at police checkpoint.

Drivers in St. Charles County were asked to take part in a government survey that involved the odd request of blood and saliva samples. The study is being conducted by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration and is supposed to be voluntary. Constitutional Law attorney Bob Herman said the study does raise some red flags. NTSB recommends lowering blood alcohol level that constitutes drunk driving. The National Transportation Safety Board voted to recommend to states that they lower the blood-alcohol content that constitutes drunken driving.

If a driver is found to have a BAC level of. The Real Threat to America. If any Bostonians objected to having their civil liberties trampled on, they were drowned out by their cheering neighbors who massed in the streets to celebrate the authorities who had turned their city into something resembling Fallujah under American military occupation. The use of police stops has been widely cited by city officials as a linchpin of New York's success story in seeing murders and major crimes fall to historic lows. Martial law would bring the crime rate to historic lows, too, but is that the kind of country we want to live in?

They do not profile based on color of skin. They profile on suspicious behavior. It's a behavioral response, not an ethnic or skin-color response. I am certain of that. The vast majority of stops are of blacks and Hispanics. Little more than ten percent end in any kind of summons. The national trend of declining crime could hang in the balance.

And the primary victims of such a reversal would be the inner-city minorities whose safety seems not to figure into attempts to undermine successful police tactics. Opposing viewpoint 2: Don't Stop Frisking. Since the early s the New York Police Department has used a crime-prevention strategy that it calls "stop, question, and frisk. The department credits the strategy in large part for the huge declines in murder and major crimes over two decades in what is now the nation's safest big city. Police officers may question an individual "where there is an 'objective, credible reason, not necessarily indicative of criminality,' to initiate the level one encounter," the unsigned opinion states.

The officers said their suspicions were heightened because of a history of crime and drug dealing in the building, but the appellate majority rejected that explanation. Technologies of Surveillance.

The NYPD is testing a new type of security apparatus that uses terahertz radiation to detect guns under clothing from a distance. Often, the courts go along. NYPD Commissioner says department will begin testing a new high-tech device that scans for concealed weapons. No doubt the system is being fine-tuned to search for marijuana.

Overlapping objects could easily appear to be a gun, which could lead to an unfortunate misunderstanding. Merely a week after military exercises featuring Blackhawk helicopters were flown over the Miami skyline, the Florida Highway Patrol has informed the public that it will set up "vehicle inspection checkpoints" on specific roadways in at least six Florida counties that will be established during daytime hours. State troopers will be requesting drivers licenses and conducting a visual inspection of every third vehicle once the checkpoint has been established.

Dear Mr. Their goal is not "public safety," but public humiliation, intimidation, and control. Cowing the peasants into meek obeisance to unchecked authority. Can waterboarding American "detainees" in clandestine torture centers really be that far behind? With just days remaining in his final term in Congress, veteran congressman Ron Paul has come out strongly against NRA President Wayne LaPierre's recommendation that armed officers should be stationed in schools nationwide. Guns and the Government. The Supreme Court has ruled consistently and countless times that the "police power," that is, the power to regulate for health, safety, welfare and morality, continues to be reposed in the states, and that there is no federal police power.

It's not about public safety. It's all about raising money for the state government. Oklahoma HB Not because you are speeding, not because you are driving erratically, but to check and see if your auto insurance is expired. In fact, it can be the primary reason you are pulled over. All they would have to say is that they were checking to see if your insurance is current. HB would allow stops for no insurance. Currently, officers do not have "probable cause for a stop" on that basis alone.

A blogger was dragged off to a mental ward because of his Facebook posts.

Prof. Gates' Unconstitutional Arrest

Exactly what you'd expect in North Korea, China, or Cuba. He was not charged with a crime, yet he was handcuffed and placed in the back of a police vehicle. From there, Mr.

Post navigation

Derision, "A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy - Kindle edition by Bertreassia Hamilton. Download it once and read it on your. Derision, "A People Arrested With No Handcuffs, Free But No Liberty, No Privacy eBook: Bertreassia Hamilton: dynipalo.tk: Kindle Store.

He was never formally arrested or charged with a crime, Mr. Whitehead said. And if that person lacks an ID, that person will very likely be arrested on the spot and held until his identity is ascertained. This is the reality of Homeland America. You must have permission to move. You do not move freely.

Even if you are walking. Shouldn't law-abiding citizens be able to live their lives free from the fear that our own government would underhandedly manipulate our rights in their pursuit of an investigation? After all, the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution enumerates a limitation on the federal government, one that prevents "unreasonable search and seizure.

Indiana has seemingly vacated the Constitution's Fourth Amendment provision against unreasonable search and seizure. The case involved a domestic dispute and the Court ruled that police can force their way into a person's home without a warrant if they deem such entry is necessary. Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home. In a decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

Supreme Court gives police a new entryway into homes. The Supreme Court, in an decision in a Kentucky case, says police officers who loudly knock on a door in search of illegal drugs and then hear sounds suggesting evidence is being destroyed may break down the door and enter without a search warrant. Department of Pre-Crime. Read the whole account of the case, which ought to get your blood boiling.

When asked three separate times due to the astounding callousness as it relates to trampling the inherent natural rights of Americans, he emphatically indicated that he would use random house to house checks, adding he felt people will welcome random searches if it means capturing a criminal. Giving too much license to cops.

A series of recent court rulings, including one this week from the US Supreme Court, appear to erode one of our bedrock defenses against the arbitrary, abusive power of the state. Home Insecurity. While the U. Supreme Court said police may force their way into a home to prevent the destruction of evidence, the Indiana Supreme Court, in a less noticed decision issued the week before, said police may force their way into a home for any reason or no reason at all. Although the victim of an illegal search can challenge it in court after the fact, three of the five justices agreed, "there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers.

The recent Indiana Supreme Court ruling against the US Constitution, rendering the Fourth Amendment null and void in that State by patently leftist activist judges, is only the latest unconscionable step in a series of actions designed to unravel each and every portion of the Bill of Rights. It is also one of the latest actions designed to compliment and enhance the already jack-booted Obama police State march into our States, our cities and homes.

Rally held in protest of 'unlawful police entry' ruling by Indiana Supreme Court. The ruling, which allows police to enter your home without a warrant, sparked threatening emails and phone calls from those angry with the court's decision.

  1. Die industrielle Prägung des Geschmacks (German Edition)!
  2. Short and Sweet.
  3. Frère Jacques.

High court urged to rethink ruling on resisting police. A group of 71 state lawmakers is asking the Indiana Supreme Court to reconsider a ruling that says people don't have the right to resist police officers who enter their homes illegally. Tennessee Speeders Could Get Fingerprinted. Motorists stopped for traffic violations in Tennessee could be fingerprinted if state lawmakers approve a bill pending in the legislature.

Currently, when drivers are cited during traffic stops, police officers ask for the driver's signature on the ticket, but the proposed bill would allow police departments to eliminate signatures and collect fingerprints. Cops pay 3 a. Their surprise visit was part of a public service campaign to remind residents to secure their homes to prevent thefts. This is just inexcusable conduct on the part of the local cops. Leaving the door to one's house unlocked is not a crime, and with no evidence of a crime in progress, the police had no right to enter the house. It is the police officers who were violating the law in this case, and if they were to face civil liability for their actions, it would go a long way toward preventing the spread of this behavior.

If these "public service campaign[s]" go unchallenged, police departments in other cities will try them out. Washington DC is a police state. Walled-Off Washington. It's hard to remember, but Washington wasn't always a city of walls. Thomas Jefferson held a public reception at the White House after his second inaugural, and citizens were able to freely wander through the building to personally ask presidents like Abraham Lincoln for jobs and other favors.

Harry Truman took long walks around Washington each morning protected by just a handful of Secret Service agents. Capitol Hill had no roadblocks or barricades, and cars and trucks passed directly in front of the White House as they drove down Pennsylvania Avenue, one of the city's busiest thoroughfares. Except that, now, you don't. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District of Nevada, the Supreme Court, in one stroke, turned Justice Jackson's advice on its head, and turned generations of TV cop shows into so much false advertising. Leaders in law enforcement say it will keep officers safe, but others argue it's a privilege that could be abused.

In Homestead, Florida, Posse Comitatus is dead. The Air Force now responds to civilian crime in the small city, population around 30, Across the country, police are using GPS devices to snare thieves, drug dealers, sexual predators and killers, often without a warrant or court order. Privacy advocates said tracking suspects electronically constitutes illegal search and seizure, violating Fourth Amendment rights of protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, and is another step toward George Orwell's Big Brother society.

Commuters who ride PATCO trains between southern New Jersey and Philadelphia should expect random searches of their clothing, pockets, bags and vehicles on their morning trip to work. Wisconsin court upholds GPS tracking by police. If a police officer puts a GPS tracking device on your car, should he or she have to get a warrant first? It's a simple question, but one, so far, without a clear legal answer.

In an example of how unsettled the issue is, in just the past week, appeals courts in two different states delivered completely opposite rulings. The Justice Department told the justices that "a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements from one place to another," and demanded the justices undo a lower court decision that reversed the conviction and life sentence of a cocaine dealer whose vehicle was tracked via GPS for a month without a court warrant. Officer admits to hiding GPS device in woman's car. A former Costa Mesa police officer has admitted to hiding a Global Positioning System device in a woman's car without her knowledge, court records show.

Aaron Paul Parsons pleaded no contest Monday to a misdemeanor charge of unlawfully using an electronic tracking device, according to Orange County Superior Court records. Cops must get warrant if DUI suspect balks at blood test. Blood samples taken from motorists without their explicit on-the-spot consent can't be used to convict them of drunken driving, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The justices acknowledged Arizona has an "implied consent" law saying motorists agree to provide a sample of blood, breath or urine for testing if they are charged with driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Supreme Court to decide whether police can take your blood without your permission.

Innocent people are wrongly accused all the time. The Bill of Rights is there precisely because the founders wanted to set a very high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured. In case you question the value of having a Justin Amash or a Ron Paul in the House of Representatives, they were two of only three votes against H. Although [Secret Service] protection isn't extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

When the Framers of the Constitution wrote the First Amendment, they lived in a society in which anyone could walk up to George Washington or John Adams or Thomas Jefferson on a public street and say directly to them whatever one wished. They never dreamed of a regal-like force of armed agents keeping public officials away from the public, as we have today. And they never imagined that it could be a felony for anyone to congregate in public within earshot or eyesight of certain government officials. Another Brick Removed.

HR was recently signed into law by President Obama. This statute had wide support amongst both parties of Congress. In essence, it criminalizes disruptive behavior upon government grounds, at specially designated national events Super Bowl, nominating conventions, etc. Obviously, the goal of this law is to enhance the ability of the Secret Service to protect those persons it is charged to do so; but in extending this power, this law eviscerates the citizens' rights to assemble and petition under the First Amendment.

Surveillance without proper authority is illegal. On June 2, , a janitor in an office building in New Brunswick, N. He told his boss, who called the local police, who notified the FBI. Later in the day, the FBI and the New Brunswick police broke into the office and discovered five men busily operating the equipment. The conundrum faced by all of these public servants soon became apparent. Who should arrest whom? The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Kennedy, joined by the court's conservative wing, wrote that courts are in no position to second-guess the judgments of correctional officials who must consider not only the possibility of smuggled weapons and drugs but also public health and information about gang affiliations. The city of Liberty required all 1, residents and anyone working within the city limits to purchase and display the sticker, but teachers at a local school had failed to do so, prompting local police to take action.

  • The Quotable Giuliani: The Mayor of America in His Own Words!
  • GLOBAL WARMING: An Essay on Global Warming?
  • The Macroeconomics of Scaling Up Aid: Lessons from Recent Experience (Occasional Paper)!

The Forfeiture Racket: Police and prosecutors won't give up their license to steal. When the DEA accuses a doctor of illegally prescribing pain medication, for example, one of the first actions it takes is to freeze his assets for possible forfeiture. Since most doctors make their entire living from their practice, nearly everything they own can be frozen. Many accused doctors therefore don't have the resources to hire legal representation, much less experts to counter government assertions that they're prescribing controlled substances outside the normal practice of medicine.

Forfeiture makes it nearly impossible for them to mount a credible defense. This has nothing to do with criminals. DNA test jailed innocent man for murder. Mayor de Blasio's NYPD SUV was cruising the wrong way with lights and sirens blaring when it got into a car crash, sparking a frantic cover-up by his security detail, a new accident report obtained by the Daily News shows.

NYPD Det. Edgar Robles was driving west against traffic on E. The mayor and two other detectives were in the vehicle at the time. Individuals who engage in controversial and unpopular political or artistic expression, by criticizing the police for example, can be labeled terrorists and subject to prosecution and suppression by the government as a result of the U. Supreme Court's decision to let stand a lower court ruling in Knox v. By refusing to hear the case of rapper Jamal Knox a.

Supreme Court has approved the government's expansion of the definition of "true threats. Warning that the government must not be given the power to criminalize speech it deems distasteful or annoying, The Rutherford Institute has asked the U. In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court, Rutherford Institute attorneys argue that the prosecution of Scott Ogle for sending complaints to a sheriff's office, including one email stating that officials were "[figuratively urinating]" on the Constitution, violates the First Amendment's safeguards for freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Moreover, Institute attorneys argue that the Texas law under which Ogle was charged, which makes it a crime to send "annoying," "alarming" or "harassing" electronic messages, is so over-broad that it could be used to punish a negative review of a restaurant posted online or caustic Facebook posts. Why should hitting a cop be a federal crime? The lopsided vote was a bipartisan portrait in cowardice that vividly showed how readily politicians forsake their oaths of office to keep their hold on power.

There are so many problems with this law. Why are masks not protected forms of expression? What about hats, hoods, and sunglasses? At what point do those fit the definition of a mask? Ironically, police routinely wear gas masks and face-covering riot helmets at these kinds of events. Apparently, the law doesn't apply to them. But that is fitting since most laws don't apply to the people who enforce them. Have you ever threatened to shoot someone with a rifle because they had a mask on? Me neither. Police are a different breed. A Kansas district attorney announced yesterday that a police officer who shot an unarmed man on his own porch will not face charges because the officer was operating under the impression that he was responding to a hostage situation.

The fatal shooting of Andrew Finch in Wichita, Kansas, drew national attention in December, as it appeared to be the first case of a "Swatting" call turning deadly. In this case, a Los Angeles man reportedly made the false call as a result of some video game dispute. Now, months after this officer took the life of her child, his fellow officers are charging HER with homicide. The enhancement, at least, can't exceed the length of the original sentence. The union's video is exactly what its title suggests it is.

It suggests that mass criticism of police behavior is akin to actual racism, judging people on the basis of wearing a blue uniform. Hate Crime Laws Codify Inequality. Because hate crime laws elevate some victims above others, their scope tends to expand over time.

If race and religion are covered, doesn't fairness demand that disability, sex, sexual orientation and gender identity be included as well? A Louisiana law that took effect last summer classifies attacks on police officers, firefighters, or paramedics as hate crimes too. Similar "Blue Lives Matter" bills have been introduced in several other states. This unseemly competition, in which interest groups vie for recognition and status, has very little to do with justice, which requires equal treatment under the law.

Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards signed the "Blue Lives Matter" bill Thursday afternoon, adding police to the list of protected categories under hate crime law such as race and religion. State Rep. Lance Harris introduced the bill after Darren Goforth, a Texas sheriff's deputy who was in uniform, was killed in , while getting gas for his patrol vehicle. Blue Lives Matter bill makes targeting police a hate crime in Louisiana. The bill is known as blue lives matter, a take off on the Black Lives Matter movement that has been critical of police in the past year.

Louisiana governor signs 'Blue Lives Matter' bill. Called the "Blue Lives Matter" bill, the measure expands the state's hate crime law to include law enforcement officers, firefighters and other emergency medical services personnel. John Bel Edwards told FoxNews. He added that he has "great respect" for the work that law enforcement officers do and the daily risks they take. Criminal justice is supposed to be administered without regard to the class or status of the parties involved.

Hate crimes introduce variable punishment based on the perpetrator's thoughts. That idea is bad enough, but this proposed new law features increased punishment based on the status of the victim, regardless of the perpetrators thoughts or intentions. It puts cops, firemen and paramedics into a new category of better-than-first-class citizens.

Once we get accustomed to it, the law will probably be modified to include all government workers. This proposed law is nothing more or less than a means of putting more people in prison with longer sentences. Louisiana's governor signed a first-of-its-kind bill Thursday afternoon that makes it a hate crime to target police officers and first responders. Killing law enforcement would be a hate crime under new bill. The Community Heroes Protection Act would make cops, firefighter and EMTs among those to be included in the state's hate crimes laws which bump violent crimes up a level and impose harsher penalties.

The legislation, sponsored by retired Upstate undersheriff, Republican Sen. Fred Akshar, was spurred in part by the death of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in the United States last year. That's the highest number since and 21 of those resulted from ambush killings, the highest number in two decades. Community Heroes! How could anyone vote against Community Heroes?

CEO of facial-recognition company calls police use "irresponsible". Last month, controversy erupted around news that at least two police departments have deployed or tested Amazon's Rekognition platform. According to the LAPD's guidelines, UAVs will not be equipped with lethal or nonlethal weapons and will only be deployed in a narrow set of circumstances. The guideline also requires officers to obtain a warrant before using a UAV "when required under the Fourth Amendment or other provision of the law.

The Fourth Amendment protects "persons, houses, papers, and effects" from "unreasonable searches and seizures. Sadly, this is not the case. Police surveillance camera in Washington, D. City officials were cited saying of the city's cameras were infected with ransomware, leaving them unable to record between Jan. The large silver SUV, which has chunky black cameras on its roof that can photograph thousands of license plates in a minute, looks nothing like the colorful cars that Google uses to create its degree interactive Street View maps.

BART police investigating the weekend killing of a passenger on a train in Oakland have no onboard video of the crime, even though the transit agency had what appear to be surveillance cameras just feet from where the suspect shot the victim at close range, The [San Francisco] Chronicle has learned. Although all BART cars have what look like cameras mounted to their ceilings, the vast majority of the devices are decoys incapable of capturing footage, BART officials conceded Wednesday. And some of the actual cameras are broken, two police sources said. This is what's know as security theater.

They sure look like security cameras! But they are only there to make you think you're safe. In reality, even if all the cameras work and they're all well-positioned, they cannot prevent crime. Hidden cactus cameras are freaking out the residents of a small Arizona town. In a small Arizona town, about half an hour drive from Phoenix, the hills don't have eyes, but the cacti do. Anti-Surveillance Camouflage for Your Face. I had slathered the paint on my face in order to hide from computers.

In the computer's vision, my face caused a momentary burst of confusion. Cameras coming to monitor St. Petersburg trail. Has the Dept. As Charlie Savage reports for the Boston Globe, the DHS has funneled "millions of dollars to local governments nationwide for purchasing high-tech video camera networks, accelerating the rise of a 'surveillance society' in which the sense of freedom that stems from being anonymous in public will be lost.

New Chicago traffic cams hit as way to track innocent people. A new traffic camera that gives Chicago police a degree view of an area is being hit as a way to potentially track people with no ties to criminal activity. This is in response to the two defendants in the case seeking to have footage from said surveillance cameras thrown out in their court case on unreasonable search and seizure grounds. On October 29, a federal district court judge ruled that police can enter onto privately owned property and install secret surveillance cameras without a warrant.

The judge did set forth a few guidelines that must be followed before such activity would be permissible, but the fact that such a scenario is accepted as constitutional by a federal judge is a serious setback for privacy and for the Fourth Amendment. Cameras were a big help in Boston, but that doesn't mean they are generally a good idea. He acknowledged privacy concerns, but said "you can't keep the tides from coming in.

The Editor interjects Is that representative government, or an omnipotent nanny state? CCTV cameras have minimal value in the fight against crime. No one looks at most CCTV footage until well after a crime is committed. And when the police do look at the recordings, it's very common for them to be unable to identify suspects. Criminals don't often stare helpfully at the lens, and [ Cameras break far too often.

GOP Rep. They're a great law enforcement method and device. Expansion of the global surveillance grid was dealt a major blow in Australia last week after a legal challenge by an individual against the State of New South Wales brought about a landmark ruling. Add Seattle to the list of local governments taking money from the Department of Homeland Security to put their citizens under federal surveillance.

It puts resources behind our vision of the city we want to see. In the run-up to Super Bowl XLVIII just be happy they don't use Egyptian numerals , the New York City Police Department is deploying an "amazing arsenal of security initiatives," including "temporary" surveillance cameras to ensure that dirty deeds remain undone at the big game. Get used to it America, this massive demonstration of pointless security theater just may be a glimpse of the future. In order to sweeten the pot of federalization, the Department of Homeland Security DHS is giving gifts of expensive gadgets to local police forces.

Who is being watched? Why are they being targeted for surveillance? Neither law enforcement nor federal agents are talking. The more important lead story of this article is buried within the outcome story of ICE agents using a private license plate database to capture illegal aliens. But start using that private database to arrest illegal aliens, and Whoa, now the ACLU says we've got a problem. Customer loyalty rewards programs used to convince the public to accept 9, private license plate readers. The die has been cast, whether it is digital drivers licenses, digital license plates, license plate readers or facial recognition cameras.

Everyone from private corporations to law enforcement follows the same script; offer Americans customer loyalty rewards programs in exchange for the loss of their privacy. Surveillance politics and law enforcement regularly tout license plate readers as a necessary extension of public safety at the expense of our privacy. But now things have gotten out of control as a recent Quartz headline warned "In just two years, 9, of these cameras ALPR were installed to spy on your car.

Yes, front-mount license plates can mess up the sleek styling of modern cars, but they've been proven time and again to help law enforcement. Having license plates on both ends of every car makes it easier to collect tolls on the many highways that have license plate readers. City of Springfield, Missouri , , U. Lexis 8th Cir.

A police officer pulled over a female motorist for speeding. He wrote her a ticket for a lesser, non-moving violation. The officer stopped her again and changed the ticket to a speeding offense. The plaintiff did not break any law that would justify the second stop and at most was exercising her free speech rights. In this case, however, the rights asserted by the motorist meet that standard. Any reasonable officer would know that a citizen who raises her middle finger engages in speech protected by the First Amendment. Cruise-Gulyas v.

Minard, , U. Lexis , Fed. They claimed that the floating bubble zone was a facially unconstitutional content-based restriction on the freedom of speech. A federal appeals court affirmed. Colorado , , U. Hill held that the governmental interests at stake—preserving clinic access and protecting patients from unwanted speech—are significant, and an 8-foot no-approach zone around clinic entrances is a narrowly tailored means to address those interests.

Price v. Lexis , WL 7th Cir. In that video, Jamal Knox, using the name Mayhem Mal, threatens to kill the two police officers and an informant that led to his conviction on a drug charge. In the lyrics, he names the police officers, and states how and where he was going to kill them, in rather specific terms. Commonwealth v. Knox, J, A. Lexis A federal statute, 8 U. Sineneng-Smith, , U. Lexis 9th Cir. The two plaintiffs were both stopped and searched by federal border patrol officers as they took photographs of activities at U. Their photos were seized and destroyed. They sued, claiming that this violated their First Amendment rights.

Askins v. Department of Homeland Security, , F. A federal appeals court held that the outdoor food sharing of vegetarian and vegan food hosted by a non-profit organization, including to homeless persons, was expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment, and therefore, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the City of Fort Lauderdale on a lawsuit challenging an ordinance enacted by the city that restricted this food sharing. In its complaint, the plaintiff argued that the ordinance, enacted in , and a related park rule violated their First Amendment free speech and free association rights and were unconstitutionally vague.

Why the Supreme Court Thinks Strip Searches Are Constitutional

The trial court disagreed, concluding that the outdoor food sharing was not constitutionally-protected expressive conduct and that the ordinance and park rule were not vague. The court reversed after examining the nature of the food sharing activity, combined with the factual context and environment in which the activity was undertaken, holding that the plaintiff engaged in a form of protected expression, expressing its message against war and for the relief of hunger. Fort Lauderdale Food Not Bombs v.

City of Fort Lauderdale, , U. Lexis 11th Cir. Further, because they could have reasonably believed that the temporary detention was lawful, they were also entitled to qualified immunity on the protesters' First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment claims. Berg v. Police Commissioner, , F. A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that a Louisiana state statute, Louisiana Revised Statutes , that criminalizes "the use of violence, force, or threats" on any public officer or employee with the intent to influence the officer's conduct in relation to his position is unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment.

Post navigation

The court ruled that section was unconstitutionally overbroad because the meaning of "threat" was broad enough to sweep in threats to take lawful, peaceful actions, such as threats to sue a police officer or challenge an incumbent officeholder. Seals v. McBee, , U. Lexis 5th Cir. Police officers were not entitled to qualified immunity in a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by attendees of a political rally in for then Presidential candidate Donald Trump, who were attacked by anti-Trump protesters as they attempted to leave the rally. The plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that the officers increased the danger to them by shepherding them into a crowd of violent protesters and that the officers acted with deliberate indifference to that danger.

Hernandez v. City of San Jose, , U. He sued to try to block the plan. He alleged that city officials devised an official plan to intimidate him. A police officer handcuffed him carried him out from a city council meeting that he was trying to address. In a lawsuit under 42 U. A federal appeals court upheld a judgment for the city. The U. Supreme Court vacated. Riviera Beach, ,1, U. A woman sued police officers, as well as a current and past mayor after the officers visited her apartment to investigate a noise complaint, gained warrantless entry, and proceeded to engage in abuse.

They then cited her for disorderly conduct and interfering with law enforcement. She asserted a violation of her First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion and her Fourth Amendment right to be free of any unreasonable search or seizure. Supreme Court noted that the First Amendment protects the right to pray but there are circumstances in which an officer may lawfully prevent a person from praying.

Her complaint did not state what the officers wanted her to do when she was allegedly told to stop praying. Without these answers, it was impossible to analyze the free exercise claim. The issue of qualified immunity demanded consideration of the ground on which the officers were present and any legitimate law enforcement interests that might have justified an order to stop praying. Sause v. Bauer, , U. The trial court erroneously entered summary judgment before any discovery had occurred. The appeals court held that the limited record before the trial court did not permit it to conclude, as a matter of law, that the enforcement zone was a nonpublic forum or, if it was, that the government satisfied the requirements for excluding the plaintiffs from that nonpublic forum.

On remand, and after appropriate discovery, the trial court will need to determine if there remain genuine issues of material fact regarding whether, and what part of, the enforcement zone was a public forum, and whether the government's exclusion policy was permissible under First Amendment principles of forum analysis. Jacobson v. A federal appeals court rejected a First and Fourteenth Amendment challenge to Section b of the California Penal Code, which criminalizes the commercial exchange of sexual activity.

Laws invalidating prostitution may be justified by rational basis review. The law is rationally related to several important governmental interests, including discouraging human trafficking and violence against women, discouraging illegal drug use, and preventing contagious and infectious diseases, any of which support a finding of no constitutional violation under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The court found that it does not violate the freedom of intimate or expressive association, rejecting an attempt to analogize prostitution to the private intimate sexual activity of sodomy found protected in Lawrence v. Texas, , U. The court also held that it does not violate the right to earn a living and does not violate the First Amendment freedom of speech because prostitution does not constitute protected commercial speech and therefore did not warrant protection.