4 ms·
One difference, this was in response to an actual search warrant granted by a judge. What DHS is doing are administrative warrants, with no judicial overview (
by softwaredoug 8mo ago
One difference, this was in response to an actual search warrant granted by a judge.
What DHS is doing are administrative warrants, with no judicial overview (unless you sue to stop them).
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- Terr_ 8mo agoWe shouldn't dignify their schemes with their jargon: They are generating internal memos and submitting complaint/threat letters.
- charcircuit 8mo ago[flagged]
- Gud 8mo agoNo they aren’t.
- charcircuit 8mo ago[flagged]
- Terr_ 8mo agoAh, you must not be American. At least over here--the subject of the news post--that belief would be considered pro-dictatorship nonsense. The US Federal government has different branches, and only certain branches have certain powers. This is widely known because we teach this to US children before they are 14 years old, sometimes aided by literal cartoons. These "warrants" are not at all equivalent, the same way that a President cannot dream up and declare a "law" (even if he calls it that) because only Congress may make those.
- PearlRiver 8mo agoWait until you find out judges are appointed by the president... It is actually amazing America managed to function as well as it has been to be honest.
- OutOfHere 8mo agoYes. It's incredible that: 1. The loopholes were not exploited sooner. 2. No one cares about patching them, not before real-world identification, and not even after identification. They only keep increasing. The only saving grace has been the two term limit of the President.
- fhdkweig 8mo agoIn a two party system, no one wants to get rid of the loopholes. Those currently in power don't think their opponents will have the opportunity to use it, and those not in power want to use it later when they finally get to be in power. Check out the two parties wanting the Line Item Veto thinking only their side would be able to use it yet horrified to see the other side use it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto_in_the_United_S...
- galangalalgol 8mo agoThe president only nominates them. The Senate confirms. Until the obama administration, judges required a supermajority of the senate to confirm, but a gop minority were filibustering all his nominees. So he asked the senate to remove the filibuster for judges. It was really the only use of the filibuster that made sense. Most democracies have independent commissions. Perhaps they all do now...
- Bud 8mo ago[dead]
- charcircuit 8mo agoThe constitution does not give the judicial branch the exclusive power of issuing warrants. Having certain exclusive powers doing mean every action can only be exclusively done by them. Each branch has an obligation to adhere to the constitution.
- chomp 8mo agoI think you’re confused on the difference between these, and what an administrative warrant is in particular.
- rayiner 8mo agoTrying to draw a distinction between the secret FISA court and administrative warrants from DHS is shaving the baloney a little thin.
- Terr_ 8mo agoDespite all its other warts, the FISA court is (A) an actual judicial-branch court (B) created by legislation and (C) the justices cannot be removed on direct Presidential whim. In contrast, "administrative warrants" are more like an executive-branch manager writing a memo, where an unscrupulous President could get them removed in a day for not writing the "right" memos.
- esafak 8mo agoYou think fisa is the good one? They're widely recognized as rubber-stamp courts.
- asveikau 8mo agoFisa doesn't have to be good for these phony sheet of paper warrants to be worse.
- rayiner 8mo agoYou’re comparing apples and oranges. These administrative warrants are very limited in scope. They are closer to the subpoenas that even ordinary civilian lawyers can send third parties in the course of litigation. They don’t give the government the power to bust into Google’s data center. The target has to respond or else challenge the warrant in court, but ordinary civilian subpoenas function the same way.
- plorkyeran 8mo agoThe entire point of having multiple branches of government is that they have different powers.
- charcircuit 8mo agoThere are both different powers and similar powers between the different branches.
- kahrl 8mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- softwaredoug 8mo agoDo you understand the difference between an administrative warrant and a judicial warrant?
- kahrl 8mo agoNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE. NOPE NOPE NOPE. ABSOLUTELY NOT.
- myvoiceismypass 8mo agoNot remotely. Not in America, at least.