Good
Strip searching for Advil ruled to violate fourth amendment rights. Thomas dissented, which is inexcusable.
6 Responses to “Good”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
June 26th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
I don’t agree re: Thomas’ dissent.
He didn’t say it was OK; he said it shouldn’t be the Supreme Court to decide. Parents should decide, acting through the school boards.
June 26th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
I don’t think that’s what he meant, but let’s assume it is. I’d still find that troubling, because it would mean that other parents get to vote on how your child is raised 7 hours of the day. In loco parentis is a horrible doctrine, and even moreso when it’s coupled with compulsory attendance laws. Also, where in the constitution does it exclude people under the age of 18 from the rights guaranteed?
June 26th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
His opinion (in as much as I’ve skimmed so far) seems to suggest that line of reasoning. ‘In loco parentis’ is currently considered constitutional (rightly or wrongly). The plaintiffs were not challenging that law and so the court must assume that that law is in fact proper.
June 26th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
It’s possible to get so smart that you don’t have any sense.
June 26th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
True, but the job of the court isn’t to determine which laws are smart.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:00 am
If the US military had made a terror suspect strip and jump, to search for contraband, it would be front page news for weeks. Why is protecting Americans less important than ensuring kids don’t have access to safe, effective medicines for a few hours per day?