Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (21258)	6/16/2006 3:22:36 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542010

The first thing that comes to my mind is that a search warrant has to describe the things sought with relative specificity, as well as with probable cause, but if illegal items or activities are in "plain sight" of the police, then they don't need a warrant to arrest the perps. So, the scenario I anticipate is that police will now prefer to burst into houses in hopes of catching the inhabitants engaged in wrong-doing. I can see the argument that this is not a violation of the Constitution because the police had a valid search warrant or arrest warrant. I don't think this is what the Founders had in mind but I can't prove it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The other thing is that this is just the opening salvo on rolling back the Warren Court. Good or bad? We'll see. The new Justices are young and healthy and will be with us for a long, long time. And Scalia is hale and hearty, so I expect he'll be around for a long, long time, as well. Brown vs. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade are hanging on by their fingernails. How long before they roll Stevens out from his bench on a gurney? Last year I shook Kennedy's hand and now wish I'd gotten his autograph. The last of the Swing Justices.