Justice Breyer warns of Orwellian government

[Anti Federalist]

What the hell, Breyer?

Are you people really that out of touch?

You really can't see that Big Brother is already here, in many cases because your court "allowed" it??!!

Or is this just blowing smoke and spin?



Justice Breyer warns of Orwellian government

By Sarah Peters - 11/08/11 04:13 PM ET

A Supreme Court justice on Tuesday expressed major concerns that the government would engage in round-the-clock surveillance reminiscent of the totalitarian world of the George Orwell novel 1984 if the court ruled in the government's favor.

The court heard oral arguments in the Jones case, in which the outcome will determine whether warrantless GPS tracking by law enforcement is an invasion of Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

Justice Stephen Breyer questioned what a democratic society would look like if people believed the government was tracking them for days at a time.

"If you win this case, then there is nothing to prevent the police or the government from monitoring 24 hours a day the public movement of every citizen of the United States,” Breyer said. “So if you win, you suddenly produce what sounds like 1984 from their brief."

U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben contended that if all Americans viewed warrantless tracking as an Orwellian invasion of privacy, Congress would step in with a legislative solution.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that unlike earlier technology, GPS tracking gives law enforcement a “mosaic” that gives them the “whole picture” rather than just a slice of it.

Police suspected D.C. nightclub owner Antoine Jones of dealing cocaine and used a GPS tracker over the course of a month to trace his movements to a stash house in Maryland. Their warrant was expired when they installed the tracker.

[fisharmor]

Breyer supported Kentucky V. King, where they ruled that police who smell something funny and hear sounds inside an apartment can burst in and arrest everyone.

[Brian4Liberty]

Didn't Breyer also support the infamous Eminent Domain decision? (Taking property from an individual to give it to a developer).

[low preference guy]

Gonzalez vs Raich

[LibForestPaul]

If you have nothing too hide...oh wait, guess Breyer just realized this applies to him as well...
cheeky rascal, little escapades with Jose down by the river...naughty naughty

[donnay]

Didn't Breyer also support the infamous Eminent Domain decision? (Taking property from an individual to give it to a developer).

Stephen Breyer did in fact vote yes in the Kelo Vs. New London case (2005).

[low preference guy]

It's Orwellian when Breyer criticizes the Orwellian society he created.

[Anti Federalist]

Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken



Breyer supported Kentucky V. King, where they ruled that police who smell something funny and hear sounds inside an apartment can burst in and arrest everyone.


Didn't Breyer also support the infamous Eminent Domain decision? (Taking property from an individual to give it to a developer).


If you have nothing too hide...oh wait, guess Breyer just realized this applies to him as well...
cheeky rascal, little escapades with Jose down by the river...naughty naughty


Stephen Breyer did in fact vote yes in the Kelo Vs. New London case (2005).

[Pauls' Revere]

What the hell, Breyer?

Are you people really that out of touch?

You really can't see that Big Brother is already here, in many cases because your court "allowed" it??!!

Or is this just blowing smoke and spin?



Justice Breyer warns of Orwellian government

By Sarah Peters - 11/08/11 04:13 PM ET

A Supreme Court justice on Tuesday expressed major concerns that the government would engage in round-the-clock surveillance reminiscent of the totalitarian world of the George Orwell novel 1984 if the court ruled in the government's favor.

The court heard oral arguments in the Jones case, in which the outcome will determine whether warrantless GPS tracking by law enforcement is an invasion of Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

Justice Stephen Breyer questioned what a democratic society would look like if people believed the government was tracking them for days at a time.

"If you win this case, then there is nothing to prevent the police or the government from monitoring 24 hours a day the public movement of every citizen of the United States,” Breyer said. “So if you win, you suddenly produce what sounds like 1984 from their brief."

U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben contended that if all Americans viewed warrantless tracking as an Orwellian invasion of privacy, Congress would step in with a legislative solution.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that unlike earlier technology, GPS tracking gives law enforcement a “mosaic” that gives them the “whole picture” rather than just a slice of it.

Police suspected D.C. nightclub owner Antoine Jones of dealing cocaine and used a GPS tracker over the course of a month to trace his movements to a stash house in Maryland. Their warrant was expired when they installed the tracker.

Thanks for posting! I saw the headline yesturday and didnt have time to read it.

[Pericles]

Justice Breyer is one of the guys who got us to where we are today ......

[Anti Federalist]

Justice Breyer is one of the guys who got us to where we are today ......

That's my main point here.

And my question is: are these guys that fucking clueless, or is it just bullshit?

[BattleFlag1776]

Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken

That black flag meant a lot more in Mencken's day than it does today.

[Brian4Liberty]

That's my main point here.

And my question is: are these guys that fucking clueless, or is it just bullshit?

Shameless reuse of my own quote, perfect for these situations:


Here's what they do believe in: they believe in a vast legal system, where all laws are open to debate and litigation. A system where any position can be defended or attacked on a "legal" basis. A system where the most powerful generally get their way, regardless of the letter or intent of the law. A system where anything can be justified. A system which enables power to reside with those with the most knowledge of the law, and how to use and manipulate it. A system where maximum employment is enjoyed for all those who desire to support, sustain and profit from the legal system.

They believe in no law at all, expertly disguised as a society fully enveloped in law.

The Constitution is the worst sort of law for them. It's far too clear, simple and supreme. The best law in their eyes is ambiguous, convoluted, complex and with no priorities at all.

[Pericles]

That's my main point here.

And my question is: are these guys that fucking clueless, or is it just bullshit?

What do they care? Laws don't apply to them.

[heavenlyboy34]

That's my main point here.

And my question is: are these guys that fucking clueless, or is it just bullshit?
These things are premeditated. However, the pawns of TPTB (the politicians, lower level parasites, police, etc) are in many cases totally oblivious. "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." -FDR ;)

[Anti Federalist]

What do they care? Laws don't apply to them.


These things are premeditated. However, the pawns of TPTB (the politicians, lower level parasites, police, etc) are in many cases totally oblivious. "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." -FDR ;)

So, as I suspected, Bryer's feigned outrage is nothing but bullshit.

Sometimes it just takes hearing it from other people to make sure that I'm not losing my mind at times.

Or, to put Bryers' position more simply, in a 'net meme fashion:

Concern Troll is Concerned.

[donnay]

Plus, Breyer is probably ready to retire and he wants it on the record he warned us! :mad:

[Anti Federalist]

Plus, Breyer is probably ready to retire and he wants it on the record he warned us! :mad:

We shoulda taken his house when we had the chance.

[donnay]

We shoulda taken his house when we had the chance.

That was David Souter--who has a farm in Weare, New Hampshire. Yes, we should have taken his property for the Lost Liberty Hotel with the side restaurant named Just Desserts! After all, the revenue that the town of Weare would have attained would have been far more than the Souter Family Farm could generate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Liberty_Hotel

[Anti Federalist]

That was David Souter--who has a farm in Weare, New Hampshire. Yes, we should have taken his property for the Lost Liberty Hotel with the side restaurant named Just Desserts! After all, the revenue that the town of Weare would have attained would have been far more than the Souter Family Farm could generate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Liberty_Hotel

Quite right, I was thinking of the wrong tyrant.

Thanks for the correction.