blank'/> Liberally Lean From The Land Of Dairy Queen: Juicy Legal Case To Be Heard By The Supreme Court

6.27.2011

Juicy Legal Case To Be Heard By The Supreme Court


Can the police constitutionally install a GPS tracking device on a person's vehicle and, if so, do they need a warrant to do so? We'll probably know next spring since the Court decided to hear the case today.

I predict we'll move another step closer to a Police State. I suspect the issue will boil down to whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy as to the location of his car.

Edit: The "well-he-was-convicted-of-[insert alleged crime]-so-I'm-don't-care-if-they-slapped-a-GPS-on-his-car" comments are already rolling in. That never ceases to amaze me. What's the old saying? Oh, yeah: "Then they came for me . . . ." Those who claim to love the Constitution do not love it all if they pick and choose who they wish for it to protect,


21 comments:

Anonymous said...

The nominal issue may be reasonable expectation of privacy, but this case will turn on "drug suspect" -- the "conservative" supremes virtually never support the 4th Amt when those scary drugs are involved.

Tater Salad said...

WHOO-WEE!!! That sumbitch sho' does got some tangled up eyes!!! How the hell does he even drive with them things!?

Anonymous said...

"Please form a line to the left if you would like to have your Constitution back..."

Arthur said...

Brother needs to get his droopy left eyelid fixed or he could be half-baked in that booking photo.

Either way, I'm interested in what opinions Justices Scalia and Ginsburg can come up with... about the issues at hand in the case not the half-baked/droopy eye conundrum.

That is all. Keep hope alive!

Anonymous said...

Why are police given so much authority over us!?! It's not like it's a huge intellectual challenge to finish "The Police Academy". They're just a bunch of power-hungry morons that got bullied a lot as kids and got picked last....

Anonymous said...

To 3:54, you obviously don't know very many cops.

Anonymous said...

Was there no other way to track him..did he not use a cell phone, or was he too elusive to follow with another vehicle? Was the GPS the key piece of evidence against him, or the only "questionable" article in the investigation?

I get the sneaky suspicion that his attorney is grasping at straws here. Just because the police "may" have used a questionable tactic, doesn't mean that all the evidence, and/or procedures were likewise questionable.

If he did the crime, he should pay the time..regardless of how he was caught.

Anonymous said...

another wreck on 380 and business 380.

Anonymous said...

You're right BG. We should leave these poor drug dealers alone. Aside from their kids, spouses, families of the people they deal to, people that have their property stolen to support a habit, the countless tax dollars spent supporting addicts because they cannot support themselves, and society as a whole, they're not hurting anyone.

Anonymous said...

You don't get it, 4:43--they set the law up using the drug dealers, because ain't nobody gonna come to the drug dealers' defense. But then they start using the laws to tract your movements. Maybe you exceeded the speed limit. They'll find you guilty of something.

I, for one, welcome our new police overlords.

Anonymous said...

"QUESTIONABLE"...!?!? WTF!!! How about an all out invasion of privacy! Ultimately, they should just admit that they're downright lazy and no good at policework. He'll walk because of the idiocracy of the investigation. ACLU should be all over this...

Anonymous said...

Wonder if Clarence Thomas will have any sympathy for him?

Anonymous said...

Why is everyone so paranoid? Why does everyone believe the police are watching them? I must not be living right.

Anonymous said...

At what point did the 100kgs of cocaine and $850,000 cash cease to be the relevant facts?

Arguing about the GPS device seems to miss the point.

Anonymous said...

The day the evil police bug my car, my phone, break into my house without a warrant, etc. is the day they will NOT find cocaine or anything else illegal. I even have this perverse faith that cops aren't out to get me. They'd probably rather have real criminals.

Anonymous said...

I wish the saying read "First they came to deport the illegals and everyone stood up in praise offering help"

But that's not what we are doing. "First they came to arrest the druggers....and everyone defended the drug smugglers"

Anonymous said...

Barry - I totally agree with your edit. How can people not see this?
Man, my job as a government teacher sometimes seems incredibly important ..... frighteningly so, even.

Anonymous said...

It cracks me up when lawyers claim they are just defending the Constitution. It's like listening to the oil companies claim their priority is protecting the environment.

Anonymous said...

BG, I don't plan on dealing cocaine, killing anyone, stealing anything, or anything else for the sake of society that you shouldn't do. Therefore, I don't have to worry about 'them coming for me'.

Anonymous said...

Really, THIS is a topic of discussion? GPS is pretty much in everything now. Cars, Watches, Cell phones, etc. The only problem with this now is that some criminal who did something and some LAWYER who couldn't get him off (one way or another) is trying to cloud people's view with the beloved accusation of "profiling". Honestly, does ANYONE go ANYWHERE anymore without a cell phone anymore?

Anonymous said...

Here's a non-drug-dealing, not-accused of anything guy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/feds-say-lawsuit-against-holder-and-mueller-over-warrantless-gps-tracking-should-be-tossed/2011/06/28/AGWlYbpH_story.html