The Justice Department for the first time has notified a criminal defendant that evidence being used against him came from a warrantless wiretap, a move that is expected to set up a Supreme Court test of whether such eavesdropping is constitutional. In other words, is eavesdropping Constitutional? WHAT DO YOU THINK?!!! In other words, are we honestly going to sit here and entertain the prospect of the Supreme Court ruling on the validity of the 4th amendment? 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. Is not a reasonable search and seizure one that is justifiably performed through the issuance of a warrant? Is the Bill of Rights not already CLEAR ENOUGH that we now are going to allow the Supreme Court an opportunity to interpret it in a way that in no way reflects what is blatantly obvious in its words? What say you?
Posted on: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:28 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015