3 ms·
Thank God for the constitution; I expect any reasonable court to toss Trump out on his ear if he tries this in about a minute.
by mises 7y ago
Thank God for the constitution; I expect any reasonable court to toss Trump out on his ear if he tries this in about a minute.
- tinus_hn 7y agoTrump has assigned his judges so you may be in for a surprise.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoTrump has assigned judges? Source?
- nostalgk 7y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appointed_by_Donald_Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appoint...
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoThat is far different from him having assigned the judges that will hear this case. And if you're thinking that it will wind up at the Supreme Court (which is likely), well, Trump appointed 2 out of 9. So "Trump has assigned his judges" still seems like a mis-characterization of the situation.
- 18pfsmt 7y agoAnyone that thinks the SCOTUS, as it is currently comprised, will allow for a ban on encryption has no idea what the legal doctrine of The Federalist Society is, nor what it means to be an American conservative. This is the most libertarian court we've had in decades. Talking about judges as being "assigned" is both inaccurate and betrays an ignorance of the American system.
- typeformer 7y agoIt's delusional to believe that conservative libertarians on SCOTUS would fight for encryption. Those people voted for Trump, the most protectionist, corrupt president in modern history, they are hypocrites at every level. The conservatives on SCOTUS just refused to address gerrymandering, they have no true concern for keeping democracy intact, their only concern is keeping the people who got them there happy. I have zero faith they would protect encryption.
- 18pfsmt 7y agoAre you calling me delusional? They ruled states have the freedom to design their own voting districts. State sovereignty has always been a thing in the US. I would encourage you to read the historical documents of the country where many of these constitutional arguments were had: The Federalist Papers
- TheSoftwareGuy 7y agoPeople seem to be forgetting that cryptographic algorithms were export restricted for a VERY long time. Trump certainly can't block Americans from selling cryptographic algorithims (or anything which implements those algorithms) if the consumer is also american. But preventing the communication of those algorithms to foreign nationals is something that was done for several decades. I think its a terrible thing for him to try to do, but he would have some legal grounds to stand on, provided the restrictions are related to foreign nationals only.
- balabaster 7y agoIf my memory serves correctly, it was protected right up until Phil Zimmerman circumvented them by writing a book containing the source code for PGP and winning the case based upon the argument that the book was protected by his constitutional right to freedom of speech(?) Unfortunately, you can't put the cat back in the bag. It's no good putting export restrictions on encryption when the tightest encryption we have at present is already available all round the world.
- codedokode 7y agoThe law had different purpose, to prevent other countries from obtaining good encryption algorithms. That law didn't forbid developing encryption software abroad and downloading it.
- gramstrong 7y agoJust like how the courts prevented mass surveillance and illegal authorization of war.
- ataturk 7y agoIt may be hard to hear, but our freedom depends on people standing up to tyranny and threatening as well as carrying out violence against those who would subject us to their control. It is the only way it will be stopped.
- fooey 7y agoreasonable courts are no longer a given, or even a safe assumption
- clarkmoody 7y agoIf the federal government only did those things specifically authorized to it in the Consitution, it would be about 1% of its present size, and nobody would care about national elections.
- mises 7y agoCorrect. Hopefully, we can get closer to that.