Blackwater Bart SASS # 60215 Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 I am headed for the funny farm when I agree with the one dissenting opinion. Good for her. This gives me the creeps. Exigency or not. I guess there is good in all of us If you look. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kentucky-v-king/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Good for her. It takes b*lls to dissent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Yeah, I know what you mean. When I came across it a few months back, I forget what similar case I was following, it kind of knocked my world view askew to see that I agreed with Ginsberg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forty Rod SASS 3935 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 God help me, but I agree with her, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Kind of amazing that a Justice with such a clear and unencumbered view of individual rights under the Fourth Amendment could simultaneously believe that there are NO individual rights created under the Second Amendment, limiting its application to State militia. LL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodine Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 The Constitution does not say "except when police feel like violating" the 4th Amendment anywhere I've ever seen. I'm one of those weirdos that carries a pocket Constitution and have hree right here at my desk. The courts are sadly misguided and abusive to the very rule of law they are supposed to uphold and protect. The SCOTUS needs to be overhauled, given two-term limits, using the Missouri Plan for appointment, and rotated out three at a time, no retirement benefits, lawyers make enough that we shouldn't need to support them anyway. Sad. Bodine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 The Constitution does not say "except when police feel like violating" the 4th Amendment anywhere I've ever seen. I'm one of those weirdos that carries a pocket Constitution and have hree right here at my desk. The courts are sadly misguided and abusive to the very rule of law they are supposed to uphold and protect. The SCOTUS needs to be overhauled, given two-term limits, using the Missouri Plan for appointment, and rotated out three at a time, no retirement benefits, lawyers make enough that we shouldn't need to support them anyway. Sad. Bodine Well.... I've practiced in jurisdictions with elected judges and also those with appointed judges. For overall fairness, I'll take appointed judges - less politicized. An independent judiciary is essential to equity in the system. Judges that have to stand for election are nothing more than politicians in robes, and you can expect them to have the same problem defending a difficult position as you see with Congressmen. As for lawyers "making enough" that they don't need retirement - not really. Lawyers, especially those in public service jobs - make much less than many folks think. LL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.