Justice Sotomayor: SCOTUS has given the police Carte Blanche to harrass....

[Contumacious]

........blacks and other minorities


Sotomayor in fiery dissent: Illegal stops 'corrode all our civil liberties'

"It is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny," she wrote. "For generations, black and brown parents have given their children 'the talk' -- instructing them never to run down the street; always keep your hands where they can be seen; do not even think of talking back to a stranger -- all out of fear of how an officer with a gun will react to them.
"By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time," she added. "It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged."


.

Who gives a fuck what that racist sp!c bitch says should be dragged out and strung up with the rest of the elitist scum

I do.


No go forth fellate and swallow,


.

Yea but your opinion is idiotic so you prefer anarchy which results in shit like Dallas Ferguson and Baton Rouge

No you stupid motherfucker , you and Charles Manson are still looking for helter skelter.


.

 

[Manonthestreet]

so again no explanation of the illegality......I know what the amendments say perhaps you say what utah court said

Stop stonewalling

Does the Fourth Amendment still applies in Utah?


.


.

You havent explained how it was breached,,,,,,what did utah say ....again....ever notice how libs never can just give a straight answer

 

[Preacher]

........blacks and other minorities


Sotomayor in fiery dissent: Illegal stops 'corrode all our civil liberties'

"It is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny," she wrote. "For generations, black and brown parents have given their children 'the talk' -- instructing them never to run down the street; always keep your hands where they can be seen; do not even think of talking back to a stranger -- all out of fear of how an officer with a gun will react to them.
"By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time," she added. "It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged."


.

Who gives a fuck what that racist sp!c bitch says should be dragged out and strung up with the rest of the elitist scum

I do.


No go forth fellate and swallow,


.

Yea but your opinion is idiotic so you prefer anarchy which results in shit like Dallas Ferguson and Baton Rouge

No you stupid motherfucker , you and Charles Manson are still looking for helter skelter.


.

Great response numb nuts! I want law and order you want anarchy

 

[Contumacious]

so again no explanation of the illegality......I know what the amendments say perhaps you say what utah court said

Stop stonewalling

Does the Fourth Amendment still applies in Utah?


.


.

You havent explained how it was breached,,,,,,what did utah say ....again....ever notice how libs never can just give a straight answer

The Utah Supreme Court CORRECTLY stated that

The Utah Supreme Court reversed. 2015 UT 2, 357 P. 3d 532. It held that the evidence was inadmissible because only “a voluntary act of a defendant’s free will (as in a confession or consent to search)” sufficiently breaks the connection between an illegal search and the discovery of evidence. Id., at 536.


.

 

[Contumacious]

........blacks and other minorities


Sotomayor in fiery dissent: Illegal stops 'corrode all our civil liberties'

"It is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny," she wrote. "For generations, black and brown parents have given their children 'the talk' -- instructing them never to run down the street; always keep your hands where they can be seen; do not even think of talking back to a stranger -- all out of fear of how an officer with a gun will react to them.
"By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time," she added. "It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged."


.

Who gives a fuck what that racist sp!c bitch says should be dragged out and strung up with the rest of the elitist scum

I do.


No go forth fellate and swallow,


.

Yea but your opinion is idiotic so you prefer anarchy which results in shit like Dallas Ferguson and Baton Rouge

No you stupid motherfucker , you and Charles Manson are still looking for helter skelter.


.

Great response numb nuts! I want law and order you want anarchy

WHY IS DISREGARDING THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND "LAW AND ORDER"?


.

 

[Manonthestreet]

so again no explanation of the illegality......I know what the amendments say perhaps you say what utah court said

Stop stonewalling

Does the Fourth Amendment still applies in Utah?


.


.

You havent explained how it was breached,,,,,,what did utah say ....again....ever notice how libs never can just give a straight answer

The Utah Supreme Court CORRECTLY stated that

The Utah Supreme Court reversed. 2015 UT 2, 357 P. 3d 532. It held that the evidence was inadmissible because only “a voluntary act of a defendant’s free will (as in a confession or consent to search)” sufficiently breaks the connection between an illegal search and the discovery of evidence. Id., at 536.


.

Cant help it guy didnt know his rights.....sounds like Supremes got it right

 

[Contumacious]

so again no explanation of the illegality......I know what the amendments say perhaps you say what utah court said

Stop stonewalling

Does the Fourth Amendment still applies in Utah?


.


.

You havent explained how it was breached,,,,,,what did utah say ....again....ever notice how libs never can just give a straight answer

The Utah Supreme Court CORRECTLY stated that

The Utah Supreme Court reversed. 2015 UT 2, 357 P. 3d 532. It held that the evidence was inadmissible because only “a voluntary act of a defendant’s free will (as in a confession or consent to search)” sufficiently breaks the connection between an illegal search and the discovery of evidence. Id., at 536.


.

Cant help it guy didnt know his rights.....sounds like Supremes got it right

.

 

[Contumacious]

She has no more credibility as an 'impartial' judge.

Why is her Fourth Amendment jurisprudence wrong?

because she is too brown?


/

I posted the story / link recently to where during a recent case involving a WHITE man she absolutely went off on this rant about how the judicial system was unfair to blacks / latinos....

The case had nothing to do with race, nothing to do with blacks, nothing to do with Latinos....but she couldn't help herself from making it about minorities anyway.

Then you have the other one who just laid her own political biase against Trump out for the whole world to see.

She correctly explained that the brunt of the ruling would impact minorities. Police officers are certain that the courts will come up with some bullshit pretext to justify their criminality.


.

 

[Fiero425]

SCOTUS has pretty much allowed cops carte blanche to do just about anything and make it justifiable! Years ago a Chicago case was ridiculously heard by them and they felt if a cop stopped you for anything; even a broken tail light, tht gave them license to search the trunk! We've had Gestapo tactics around for years; how can people not see this happening? Now cops can kill you during a traffic stop with impunity; video evidence showing the events, but they still get off! Do I have to run down the list of shootings where charges never came down or they were deemed "not guilty?" How many times do you think this can go on before society freaks out and start shooting back gratuitously like in Beirut?

 

[Manonthestreet]

Again what are we missing guy walked into drug house and out in possession of drugs and got stopped oh the horrors

 

[easyt65]

She has no more credibility as an 'impartial' judge.

Why is her Fourth Amendment jurisprudence wrong?

because she is too brown?


/

I posted the story / link recently to where during a recent case involving a WHITE man she absolutely went off on this rant about how the judicial system was unfair to blacks / latinos....

The case had nothing to do with race, nothing to do with blacks, nothing to do with Latinos....but she couldn't help herself from making it about minorities anyway.

Then you have the other one who just laid her own political biase against Trump out for the whole world to see.

She correctly explained that the brunt of the ruling would impact minorities. Police officers are certain that the courts will come up with some bullshit pretext to justify their criminality.


.

It had nothing to do with race...she made it about race.

 

[MarathonMike]

Thanks Obama for giving us the wise Latina who provided us with this retarded boast revealing how biased she is:
"
I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.
"

 

[Howey]

........blacks and other minorities


Sotomayor in fiery dissent: Illegal stops 'corrode all our civil liberties'

"It is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny," she wrote. "For generations, black and brown parents have given their children 'the talk' -- instructing them never to run down the street; always keep your hands where they can be seen; do not even think of talking back to a stranger -- all out of fear of how an officer with a gun will react to them.
"By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time," she added. "It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged."


.

Given your sig line, I'll assume you think she's right. (She is)

 

[Contumacious]

SCOTUS has pretty much allowed cops carte blanche to do just about anything and make it justifiable! Years ago a Chicago case was ridiculously heard by them and they felt if a cop stopped you for anything; even a broken tail light, tht gave them license to search the trunk! We've had Gestapo tactics around for years; how can people not see this happening? Now cops can kill you during a traffic stop with impunity; video evidence showing the events, but they still get off! Do I have to run down the list of shootings where charges never came down or they were deemed "not guilty?" How many times do you think this can go on before society freaks out and start shooting back gratuitously like in Beirut?

Yes indeed


Breath tests, blood draws: Americans have no protection against mandatory breathalyzer tests at a police checkpoint, although mandatory blood draws violate the Fourth Amendment (Birchfield v. NorthDakota).

Ignorance of the law is defensible if you work for the government: Police officers who violate the law can be granted qualified immunity if they claim ignorance of the law (Heien v. North Carolina). That rationale was also applied to police who clearly used excessive force when they repeatedly tasered a pregnant woman during a routine traffic stop and were granted immunity from prosecution (Brooks v.City of Seattle)


So those insurgents who shoot at the police object to the constant apologies used by the "courts" to let the police of the hook.


.

 

[Contumacious]

Again what are we missing guy walked into drug house and out in possession of drugs and got stopped oh the horrors

Let me remind you , you miserable stupid fuck, that AMERICANS ARE FREE PEOPLE


Text "justice" Roberts and Co and remind them that the NINTH AMENDMENT protect the rights of AMERICANS TO SELF MEDICATE.

I am certain that the son of a bitch avoids the 9A like the plague. It would prevent the motherfucker from creating and supporting the gargantuan police state.


.


.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Again what are we missing guy walked into drug house and out in possession of drugs and got stopped oh the horrors

Let me remind you , you miserable stupid fuck, that AMERICANS ARE FREE PEOPLE


Text "justice" Roberts and Co and remind them that the NINTH AMENDMENT protect the rights of AMERICANS TO SELF MEDICATE.

I am certain that the son of a bitch avoids the 9A like the plague. It would prevent the motherfucker from creating and supporting the gargantuan police state.


.


.

yep..he was free not to walk into a drug house....not to purchase illegal drugs......oooops.......

 

[Contumacious]

Thanks Obama for giving us the wise Latina who provided us with this retarded boast revealing how biased she is:
"
I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.
"

Yes, indeed.

The SCOTUS majority is completely and totally responsible for the police officers deaths'

The court can immunized criminal police officers from lawsuits but can do NOTHING to stop the insurgents bullets.


.


.

 

[Fiero425]

SCOTUS has pretty much allowed cops carte blanche to do just about anything and make it justifiable! Years ago a Chicago case was ridiculously heard by them and they felt if a cop stopped you for anything; even a broken tail light, tht gave them license to search the trunk! We've had Gestapo tactics around for years; how can people not see this happening? Now cops can kill you during a traffic stop with impunity; video evidence showing the events, but they still get off! Do I have to run down the list of shootings where charges never came down or they were deemed "not guilty?" How many times do you think this can go on before society freaks out and start shooting back gratuitously like in Beirut?

Yes indeed


Breath tests, blood draws: Americans have no protection against mandatory breathalyzer tests at a police checkpoint, although mandatory blood draws violate the Fourth Amendment (Birchfield v. NorthDakota).

Ignorance of the law is defensible if you work for the government: Police officers who violate the law can be granted qualified immunity if they claim ignorance of the law (Heien v. North Carolina). That rationale was also applied to police who clearly used excessive force when they repeatedly tasered a pregnant woman during a routine traffic stop and were granted immunity from prosecution (Brooks v.City of Seattle)


So those insurgents who shoot at the police object to the constant apologies used by the "courts" to let the police of the hook.


.

Amen & hallelujah to that!

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Cons don't about our rights other than the 2nd .

Minutes after Edward Strieff walked out of a South Salt Lake City home, an officer stopped him, questioned him, and took his identification to run it through a police database. The officer did not suspect that Strieff had done anything wrong. Strieff just happened to be the first person to leave a house that the officer thought might contain “drug activity.” App. 16–19. As the State of Utah concedes, th


UTAH v. STRIEFF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF UTAH No. 14–1373. Argued February 22, 2016—Decided June 20, 2016


.

For the first time, I'm forced to agree with you on this particular constitutional point. The decision in Utah v. Strieff will now throw out not only the "fruits of the poison tree" doctrine, but along with that likely a big chunk of the Exclusionary Rule. All police stops, home visits, etc. may now give a LEO the authority to go fishing and search the person(s) or place(s) of interest for anything without a warrant, probable cause or even reasonable suspicion if this precedent stands. It would even eliminate the minimum legal requirements for a "Terry Stop". That is more than a slippery slope...it's a cliff!

A passage from the decision;

At the suppression hearing, the prosecutor conceded that Officer Fackrell lacked reasonable suspicion for the stop but argued that the evidence should not be suppressed because the existence of a valid arrest warrant attenuated the connection between the unlawful stop and the discovery of the contraband. [Emphasis Added] ~~https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-1373~~

Now all you Amendment II nuts afraid of the insidious "gun grabbers" need to pay some attention to this. This decision could set the precedent that may allow authorities to search your property and private effects WITHOUT A WARRANT. They don't even need to meet the lowest standard to search for cover; reasonable suspicion. With this decision by those five Conservative Justices deciding against precedents more than 100 years old, an entire body of law may be kicked to the curb and potentially Amendment IV with it! Be careful what you wish for!

 

[Contumacious]

Again what are we missing guy walked into drug house and out in possession of drugs and got stopped oh the horrors

Let me remind you , you miserable stupid fuck, that AMERICANS ARE FREE PEOPLE


Text "justice" Roberts and Co and remind them that the NINTH AMENDMENT protect the rights of AMERICANS TO SELF MEDICATE.

I am certain that the son of a bitch avoids the 9A like the plague. It would prevent the motherfucker from creating and supporting the gargantuan police state.


.


.

yep..he was free not to walk into a drug house....not to purchase illegal drugs......oooops.......

He was free to walk into a drug house....he was free to purchase "drugs"


.