5 ms·
Why are judges only focusing on the "search" part of the Fourth Amendment and not on the "seizure" part as well? That kind of action should count as a seizure,
by mtgx 10y ago
Why are judges only focusing on the "search" part of the Fourth Amendment and not on the "seizure" part as well?
That kind of action should count as a seizure, no?
> 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.
- btilly 10y agoIf you still have the thing, it clearly hasn't been seized. Therefore the only question left is whether it was a search.
- justinclift 10y agoThat draws an interesting counterpoint: the RIAA's long standing attempt to have copying of non-physical things be perceived as theft.
- bitexploder 10y agoIt is right out of a comedian sketch. Then govt massively penalizes citizens for doing a thing. Turn around with a straight face and tell you, in the name of National Security, that it is okay for them to do it.
- tastythrowaway2 10y agoScumbag Uncle Sam