The Supreme Court struck another blow to the Bill of Rights with its 8-1 decision to expand police power in situations where police perform traffic stops based on imaginary laws. The Heien v. North Carolina decision held that an officer’s “reasonable mistake of law” can lead to an allowable search and arrest for contraband.
The circumstances involving how Navarette came to be stopped and his truck subsequently searched provided the basis for a Fourth Amendment case that ultimately went before the highest court in the nation. At issue is whether the Fourth Amendment allows police to stop a vehicle based on an anonymous tip of reckless driving without first witnessing the alleged behavior.
BOWLING GREEN, NY — The case, Hedges v. Obama, challenged the constitutionality of Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which allows for indefinite detention of anyone accused of terrorism, even American citizens, without a trial. The Supreme Court put the final nail in this suit by denying to hear the case, without comment.
A distinguished member of the U.S. Supreme Court gave a sobering reminder of how history can and likely will repeat itself when the conditions are right. Justice Antonin Scalia said that he would not be surprised if Americans were once again imprisoned in concentration camps by the federal government.
While some “journalists” would have you believe the biggest stories of 2013 were about twerking celebrities and over-hyped real-life courtroom sagas, much bigger events were happening with far more lasting national significance. The foundation of an American police state is already laid and making its existence known, while most of the country remains blissfully focused on sports, reality shows, establishment pseudo-news, and other distractions.
In some states, police collect DNA from all arrestees and store it indefinitely in a DNA database — guilty or innocent, charged or released. A federal court will soon weigh in on the issue.
The Obama administration petitioned the supreme court last week to resolve 4th Amendment confusion over whether searches & seizures of cell phones without a warrant are indeed lawful. The Administration argues that there is a large body of case law that allows police officers to search possessions on the person of an arrested suspect, including hand-written notes and files, as well as personal electronic devices. The government contends that a cellphone is no different than any other object a suspect might be carrying.