3 ms·
> I don't find Gorsuch's quoted counterposition convincing. Gorsuch called the court’s opinion “novel” and “mistaken.” The majority “holds that a criminal susp
by at-fates-hands 6y ago
> I don't find Gorsuch's quoted counterposition convincing.
Gorsuch called the court’s opinion “novel” and “mistaken.” The majority “holds that a criminal suspect can be simultaneously seized and roaming at large. ... In two centuries filled with litigation over the 4th Amendment’s meaning, this court has never before adopted the majority’s definition of a ‘seizure.’ Neither the Constitution nor common sense can sustain it.”
Sounds a bit like Schrödinger's cat dilemma. Can a suspect be considered "seized" while at the same time roaming free? I think that was his point. You can't really expand the notion to attempted - doesn't it have to be one state or other?
- michaelmrose 6y agoIf you were arrested without good cause and then let free you were seized, past tense, and then free at the same time. The same is true if you were held momentarily then got free. Being freed in 10 seconds or 10 years later doesn't make the seizure less unlawful and your current disposition should have little to do with deciding what WAS lawful at time of seizure. Deciding that shooting a suspect unlawfully counts as detaining them is more challenging than the current state. I would prefer to call it attempted murder and prosecute the shooter.
- amscanne 6y agoThe suspect was, at no point during the time period relevant to complaint, under the physical control of the police. That's the point. You can say that you were "seized" if the physical control lasted 10 seconds or 10 years, but in this case there was only attempted seizure.
- theossuary 6y agoI don't know, I think shooting somebody (or even shooting at somebody) puts them under your physical control.
- remarkEon 6y ago>Sounds a bit like Schrödinger's cat dilemma. Yes. I recommend reading the whole opinion (both the Majority and the Dissent). It really is an interesting question.
- AlexandrB 6y agoI don't get it. You can be charged with attempted murder or attempted robbery, where you failed to do the thing you're guilty of, just fine. Why is this different?