The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has “ruled” that agents of the government may trespass on your property and attach surveillance devices on your vehicles, and most likely anything else they care to do. All this without a warrant because, the Court says, you don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy on your own property. Never mind that we DO have a reasonable expectation to not be tracked by government agents without probable cause or warrants and a reasonable expectation that government agents coming onto your private property without a warrant is trespassing. Just what the hell does the word “private” mean to these black robed tyrants on the bench?
It’s just another sign that you have NO property Rights in America any longer, folks. Your property has been taken from you by fiat through the Courts.
Here’s a rather interesting quote from the article below:
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who dissented from this month’s decision refusing to reconsider the case, pointed out whose homes are not open to strangers: rich people’s. The court’s ruling, he said, means that people who protect their homes with electric gates, fences and security booths have a large protected zone of privacy around their homes. People who cannot afford such barriers have to put up with the government sneaking around at night.
You read that right. Only the rich who can afford electric fences, security booths and other means to protect their property have a Right to privacy from government agents.
The only glimmer of hope for privacy on your own property is the fact that this Court is the most overturned Court in the Country. Let’s hope this becomes yet another example of that if this gets to the SCOTUS.
A snippet, then the jump:
Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn’t violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway – and no reasonable expectation that the government isn’t tracking your movements.
That is the bizarre – and scary – rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants – with no need for a search warrant. (Read about one man’s efforts to escape the surveillance state.)
It is a dangerous decision – one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.
The Jump:
news.yahoo.com
Related posts:
Welcome to obamaANC rules. Get used to it. You own nothing, it all belongs to blacks and muslims.
The most leftist group in America…tyranny nearly always begins from the leftsist stalinists..
WELCOME TO BOOBAMA COMMUNISM!!!!!!
ONLY A FULL SCALE ARMED REVOLUTION WILL GET OUR COUNTRY BACK .
It’s good to see others take notice of this horrific decision. But what they are ignoring is how it reflects a broader destruction of personal privacy and civil rights in this country. – http://disenchantedjourno.blogspot.com/2010/08/thought-of-day-personal-privacy-and.html
They have appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:
District of Alaska
District of Arizona
Central District of California
Eastern District of California
Northern District of California
Southern District of California
District of Hawaii
District of Idaho
District of Montana
District of Nevada
District of Oregon
Eastern District of Washington
Western District of Washington
It also has appellate jurisdiction over the following territorial courts:
District Court of Guam
District of the Northern Mariana Islands
….and eight other western states. can someone please tell me what those states and i will not spend $ there ! with the exception of arizona
"Philoctetes says:
Who gives a shit. If you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about. They can follow me into Grand Central Station’s lavatory, if they want."
It's not whether you have something to hide, it whether you have something to protect. Like the freedom to be left alone from intrusive government. It's a little thing called "liberty"…look it up.
Thank God thinking people know what the issue is.
Who gives a shit. If you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about. They can follow me into Grand Central Station’s lavatory, if they want.
Solution is simple, enter my castle alive without permission and warrant, and leave it dead with my permission. I don’t need a forth Amendment, I have the death penalty in hand. Reason, cornered animals have no where to run, so they fight back with all at they have at hand. And dead men tell no tales. Just make sure to put big holes in the lungs and fill them with lime before you put on the cement boots, that way they won’t float up to the top of the nearest sewer.
Profile on Chief Judge Alex Kozinski,
Kozinski was born in Bucharest, Romania. In 1962, when he was 12, his parents, both Holocaust survivors, brought him to the United States. The family settled in Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California, where his father, Moses, ran a small grocery store.
Kozinski graduated from the University of California, Los Angeles, receiving an A.B. degree in 1972, and from the UCLA School of Law, receiving a J.D. degree in 1975. Kozinski clerked for future Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Ninth Circuit from 1975 to 1976, and then for Justice Warren Burger from 1976 to 1977. From June 5, 1981 to August 1982, Kozinski served as the first U.S. Special Counsel appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
Kozinski’s first judicial appointment was as chief judge at the newly formed United States Court of Federal Claims in 1982.
In 1985, at the age of 35, Kozinski was appointed to a new seat at the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by President Ronald Reagan, making him the youngest federal appeals court judge in the country
Tell us Chief Judge Jackass, why does any government agent need to “sneak” on my property in the middle of the night ?
Since your background states that your parents were Holocaust survivors ,how do you justify yourself?
Consider this Judge moron, if Hitler had GPS devices you would not be alive today, he would have done the very thing you just decreed and would have all the Jews tracked with GPS and would have hit the jackpot, you fool.
President Ronald Regan must be spinning in his grave for appointing an idiot and subversive like you.
Lastly Judge, the fourth amendment to the constitution guarantees the right of the people to secure in their persons,houses,papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. You need a Warrant for probable cause you dummy?
You must be looking for a Supreme Court appointment from your messiah Obama, you could fit in with the scum he just had appointed.
nmgene
You are correct, the article is misleading and vague , and I falsely accused the Judge of being a sedulous moron, In which I owe him an apology .He stood up for the fourth amendment. I did some research and found the facts that were missing in this article and posted some of it below. Also notice that this happened in February.
Judge Alex Kozinski: The Fourth Amendment is Gone. "Welcome to the fish bowl."
Damon W. Root | February 23, 2010
Last week the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied an en banc rehearing of the case United States v. Lemus, which dealt with a warrantless police search of a suspect’s home after he was arrested outside of it. As a result of the 9th Circuit’s denial, the search will stand, which has left Chief Judge Alex Kozinski none too happy. In dissent, Kozinksi basically accused his colleagues of abandoning the Fourth Amendment:
Al Dente;
This was a little hard to understand. Kozinski was the only Judge who desented. The rest voted not to hear the case. Kozinski was against it. You have to read it slowly and think about what he said. I had to go back and read it twice before I understood it. The paragraph wasnt written very well.
What part of this is misleading?
What I wrote was in agreement with this judge. That the ruling is tantamount to having only the rich enjoying the Right to privacy.
I’m sorry you guys didn’t see what was being said. But the article is not misleading.
you also never said what the case was about, the men were buying large amount of material that could have been used to make bombs, in that case i think the goverment should keep and eye on them, dont you?
The conservative supreme court got rid of eminent domain. I guess thats obabma's fault too eh?