3 ms·

There needs to be a landmark supreme court case that decides that "Search and Seizure" protections include paying corporations for the sought after items.

b00ty4breakfast 9mo ago
As long as Alito and Thomas are still alive, this will never happen. I have no doubt that both of them have been the recipients of Peter Thiel's "generosity".
- ch4s3 9mo ago
  It’s not just Alito and Thomas who have been hostile to the 4th amendment, disrespect for the 4th amendment has been a bipartisan affair for 50 years. I don’t see why anyone is downvoting this, it’s trivial to see the history of votes on 4th amendment cases. Terry v Ohio is a great example.
  - b00ty4breakfast 9mo ago
    because this isn't simply a matter of the constitution, it involves a massive corporation and both of these men have been caught receiving gifts from wealthy "friends" then openly refusing to cooperate when this information came to light. We are assuming they are the only 2 doing (and as far as I know, none of the other judges have been implicated) but that's like finding two drunk guys passed out on a bench on a college campus and assuming that binge drinking isn't rampant in college.
    - ch4s3 9mo ago
      You’re claim is totally unrelated to what I’m saying.
- dragonwriter 9mo ago
  > As long as Alito and Thomas are still alive, this will never happen. Unless the court shrinks down to three seats (or four, if the Circuits cooperate) Alito and Thomas alone can’t dictate the way the Court treats the issue.
leftbrainstrain 9mo ago
I thought Carpenter vs United States was that case, but apparently it wasn't. Terry stops by local officers based on tips from regional Fusion Centers via WhatsApp sounds less unusual every day. Parallel construction has become a long-established technique.
thfuran 9mo ago
I don't want to see any more landmark cases from the current supreme court.
vharuck 9mo ago
I would hope this case wouldn't be hard to make. If the government isn't allowed to censor people through third parties (e.g., threaten onerous investigations of a platform unless a specific person is kicked off), the government shouldn't be allowed to conduct unreasonable searches through a third party. Would we be okay if the FBI contracted with private detective firms to conduct warrantless searches?
rayiner 9mo ago
But what would be the legal basis for such a decision?

b00ty4breakfast 9mo ago

As long as Alito and Thomas are still alive, this will never happen. I have no doubt that both of them have been the recipients of Peter Thiel's "generosity".

ch4s3 9mo ago
It’s not just Alito and Thomas who have been hostile to the 4th amendment, disrespect for the 4th amendment has been a bipartisan affair for 50 years. I don’t see why anyone is downvoting this, it’s trivial to see the history of votes on 4th amendment cases. Terry v Ohio is a great example.
- b00ty4breakfast 9mo ago
  because this isn't simply a matter of the constitution, it involves a massive corporation and both of these men have been caught receiving gifts from wealthy "friends" then openly refusing to cooperate when this information came to light. We are assuming they are the only 2 doing (and as far as I know, none of the other judges have been implicated) but that's like finding two drunk guys passed out on a bench on a college campus and assuming that binge drinking isn't rampant in college.
  - ch4s3 9mo ago
    You’re claim is totally unrelated to what I’m saying.
dragonwriter 9mo ago
> As long as Alito and Thomas are still alive, this will never happen. Unless the court shrinks down to three seats (or four, if the Circuits cooperate) Alito and Thomas alone can’t dictate the way the Court treats the issue.

leftbrainstrain 9mo ago

I thought Carpenter vs United States was that case, but apparently it wasn't. Terry stops by local officers based on tips from regional Fusion Centers via WhatsApp sounds less unusual every day. Parallel construction has become a long-established technique.

thfuran 9mo ago

I don't want to see any more landmark cases from the current supreme court.

vharuck 9mo ago

I would hope this case wouldn't be hard to make. If the government isn't allowed to censor people through third parties (e.g., threaten onerous investigations of a platform unless a specific person is kicked off), the government shouldn't be allowed to conduct unreasonable searches through a third party. Would we be okay if the FBI contracted with private detective firms to conduct warrantless searches?

rayiner 9mo ago

But what would be the legal basis for such a decision?