The 4th implies the right of privacy even if it can’t claim to make it manifest.
Roe was decided while Nixon was in the White House, and no matter how hard we try we don’t seem to able to get away from him. The Roe decision has many flaws as a decision, not as an outcome. There were stronger cases to be made, but they weren’t, and we are stuck with the shaky result.
This FISA amendment attacks a lot of Constitutional principles that the current Supreme Court shouldn’t be trusted with, but that’s where this is going.
Barring any major changes, Justice Kennedy will be deciding all of the cases for the foreseeable future.
]]>As for the threat to Roe v. Wade, that case was decided primarily on a Fourteenth Amendment basis, but a deliberate destruction of the Fourth Amendment endangers everyone who may or may not have arguably committed a crime, and believe me, some people will make the argument that abortion is a crime, whatever the courts may rule. Then again, I don’t have the credentials to comment on the legal aspect… all my contract work for Planned Parenthood has been in the IT arena. What about yours?
]]>The pattern is laid.
]]>Consider, e.g., the recent ruling by a Ninth Circuit panel which allows Customs to seize an American citizen’s laptop on re-entry to the U.S., without a warrant and without even “reasonable suspicion,” making a copy of the HD if they wish.
This is not merely theoretical: the ruling undermines a couple of dozen lawsuits by people whose civil liberties were seriously infringed. The Fourth Amendment is under assault by people motivated entirely and only by the enhancement of their own power… and the courts are helping them.
]]>We ought not to have secret FISA courts at all issuing rubber stamp warrants. Bush hasn’t even been bothering with those warrants, however. FISA means there is theoretically judicial oversight.
]]>