Lucille
09-27-2013, 08:52 AM
This will be the attitude of most of our black-robed overlords, in the event it goes to SCOTUS.
This Is What Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Thinks About Your Privacy Rights...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-26/what-supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-thinks-about-your-privacy-rights
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spoke yesterday at the Northern Virginia Technology Council’s (NVTC) Titans breakfast gathering in McLean, Virginia. He discussed the fact that prior to a Supreme Court decision in 1967, there were no constitutional prohibitions on wiretaps because conversations were not explicitly granted privacy protection under the Fourth Amendment. He goes on to imply that he thinks it was better before such privacy rights existed.
According to the AP:
Scalia said that before the court’s 1967 opinion on wiretapping, the high court held the view that there were no constitutional prohibitions on wiretaps because conversations were not explicitly granted privacy protection under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against Americans against unreasonable search and seizure of “their persons, houses, papers, and effects.”
But he said then the Warren court stepped in and found that “there’s a generalized right of privacy that comes from penumbras and emanations, blah blah blah, garbage.”
Blah, blah, blah garbage is how a Supreme Court Justice describes privacy protections. Protections that may have prevented FBI surveillance against Martin Luther King Jr., John Lennon and countless other activists. Remember that: All My Heroes Have FBI Files.
When Scalia's quoted by posterity, I hope "Blah blah blah, garbage" is the one quoted most.
Let's compare (www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?422999-Letter-From-Edward-Snowden%92s-Father-And-His-Lawyer-Bruce-Fein-To-President-Obama) him to another SCOTUS Justice on the Fourth:
The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
These, I protest, are not mere second-class rights but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. And one need only briefly to have dwelt and worked among a people possessed of many admirable qualities but deprived of these rights to know that the human personality deteriorates and dignity and self-reliance disappear where homes, persons and possessions are subject at any hour to unheralded search and seizure by the police.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5501/9960047904_8df0e2607f_b.jpg
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-09-26/antocrony-scalia
This Is What Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Thinks About Your Privacy Rights...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-26/what-supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-thinks-about-your-privacy-rights
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spoke yesterday at the Northern Virginia Technology Council’s (NVTC) Titans breakfast gathering in McLean, Virginia. He discussed the fact that prior to a Supreme Court decision in 1967, there were no constitutional prohibitions on wiretaps because conversations were not explicitly granted privacy protection under the Fourth Amendment. He goes on to imply that he thinks it was better before such privacy rights existed.
According to the AP:
Scalia said that before the court’s 1967 opinion on wiretapping, the high court held the view that there were no constitutional prohibitions on wiretaps because conversations were not explicitly granted privacy protection under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against Americans against unreasonable search and seizure of “their persons, houses, papers, and effects.”
But he said then the Warren court stepped in and found that “there’s a generalized right of privacy that comes from penumbras and emanations, blah blah blah, garbage.”
Blah, blah, blah garbage is how a Supreme Court Justice describes privacy protections. Protections that may have prevented FBI surveillance against Martin Luther King Jr., John Lennon and countless other activists. Remember that: All My Heroes Have FBI Files.
When Scalia's quoted by posterity, I hope "Blah blah blah, garbage" is the one quoted most.
Let's compare (www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?422999-Letter-From-Edward-Snowden%92s-Father-And-His-Lawyer-Bruce-Fein-To-President-Obama) him to another SCOTUS Justice on the Fourth:
The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
These, I protest, are not mere second-class rights but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. And one need only briefly to have dwelt and worked among a people possessed of many admirable qualities but deprived of these rights to know that the human personality deteriorates and dignity and self-reliance disappear where homes, persons and possessions are subject at any hour to unheralded search and seizure by the police.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5501/9960047904_8df0e2607f_b.jpg
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-09-26/antocrony-scalia