abcabc321321123

4 ms·

1.
by abcabc321321123 12y ago
> My understanding is that there's somewhat of a gray area for requests that do not accurately enough specify the information desired. The agency in question can basically say "We don't understand what you're requesti
2.
by abcabc321321123 12y ago
> The commerce clause just says that the federal government has the authority to regulate interstate commerce. This is not completely correct. Let me expand a little bit even though it is not applicable here. There is something called th
3.
by abcabc321321123 12y ago
Yes, that statute requires a warrant. However, the exclusionary rule is only applicable to one with a "reasonable expectation of privacy." In the hypothetical, C does not have such an expectation, and therefore C cannot challenge
4.
by abcabc321321123 12y ago
That is correct, but the warrant requirement does not follow common sense. Let me try to explain further with an example. A sends a letter to B with information in the letter that implicates C in a crime. The FBI does not have a warrant to
5.
by abcabc321321123 12y ago
This is something that a significant amount of people do not understand. The fiduciary duty in this situation runs to the company not to individual employees.
6.
by abcabc321321123 12y ago
The same thing happened to me.
7.
by abcabc321321123 13y ago
>stealing from your fellow citizens who are paying their taxes. You are confusing who is stealing from whom.
8.
by abcabc321321123 13y ago
That is not a fair comparison. California's gas tax (including excise tax) is higher than Oregon. In addition, California requires a more expensive blend of gasoline. A better comparison would be to a state that has similar taxes and g
9.
by abcabc321321123 13y ago
From Tesla's 10-k, "While our plan is to attempt to produce lithium-ion cells and finished battery packs for our Gen III vehicles at a new Tesla Gigafactory, our plans for such production are at a very early stage. We have no expe