SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

User avatar
snarfing
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 11:39 am

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by snarfing » Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:54 am

Cant say im surprised by the outcome of the master piece cake shop case, but I definately dont agree with their reasoning. To me nearly all of the majorities arguments cut in favor of the couple, not the bakeshop

User avatar
Mr. Peanutbutter
Posts: 4595
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:34 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by Mr. Peanutbutter » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:02 am

snarfing wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:54 am
Cant say im surprised by the outcome of the master piece cake shop case, but I definately dont agree with their reasoning. To me nearly all of the majorities arguments cut in favor of the couple, not the bakeshop
This is exactly what RBG said (I didn’t read the opinion, just breezed through her dissent)


BearCat
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by BearCat » Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:55 pm

I just don't buy that making a wedding cake with no descriptions, text, or defined imagery is protected 1A speech. What, now providing tablecloths for weddings is 1A speech??

User avatar
stego
Posts: 4644
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:01 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by stego » Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:53 pm

BearCat wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:55 pm
I just don't buy that making a wedding cake with no descriptions, text, or defined imagery is protected 1A speech. What, now providing tablecloths for weddings is 1A speech??
Haven't read the opinion itself yet but it sounds like the Court expanded free exercise without touching the free speech arguments.

BearCat
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by BearCat » Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:00 pm

stego wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:53 pm
BearCat wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:55 pm
I just don't buy that making a wedding cake with no descriptions, text, or defined imagery is protected 1A speech. What, now providing tablecloths for weddings is 1A speech??
Haven't read the opinion itself yet but it sounds like the Court expanded free exercise without touching the free speech arguments.
Pretty sure the free exercise only applied because baking a wedding cake was considered forcing speech (akin to asking a baker bake a "homosexuality is sin" cake). Court clearly said that if the baker refused service period, it would not be protected by free exercise.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9901
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by Nebby » Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:01 pm

stego wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:53 pm
BearCat wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:55 pm
I just don't buy that making a wedding cake with no descriptions, text, or defined imagery is protected 1A speech. What, now providing tablecloths for weddings is 1A speech??
Haven't read the opinion itself yet but it sounds like the Court expanded free exercise without touching the free speech arguments.
They didn't expand anything. The government is supposed to remain neutral in matters of religious beliefs the Court ruled that the Commission exhibited open hostility towards Phillips' religious beliefs and thus the Commission failed to remain neutral.

User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Big Tent Energy
Posts: 13160
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Wed Jun 06, 2018 9:33 am

X-post from lunge politx thread:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... urt-218590
But by framing the case as it did, the Court made its limited decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission a warm-up act for another decision expected later this month—one at least as anticipated as Monday’s wedding-cake decision. That other case is Hawaii v. Trump, the case about the executive order banning entry into the United States by nationals of several countries, most of them majority-Muslim. That case, like the wedding-cake case, is about the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause. The author of Monday’s decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy, is generally assumed to be the swing vote in the entry-ban case. And over and over in Monday’s decision, Justice Kennedy articulated positions directly relevant to the entry ban—all of them running against the Trump administration’s position.
This is a wildly optimistic take but I'm on board.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9901
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by Nebby » Wed Jun 06, 2018 9:18 pm

E.D. Pennsylvania rules DOJ can't withhold funds, because it's unconstitutional, based on Philly's status as a sanctuary city.

http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/ ... D0391P.pdf

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9901
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by Nebby » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:10 am



Link to decision:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/1 ... 0_f2q3.pdf

An Ohio process purges non-voters if they do not respond to a notice and do not vote in the 4 years following the notice. Here's the process: (1) A person fails to vote in a federal election. (2) The state sends a notice asking if the voter has moved. (3) Voter does not respond to notice or vote in a federal election within the next 4 years. (4) Voter is purged from voting list.

The argument was that using non-voting violated the law.

The majority held that, because non-voting is illegal if it is the sole criterion for purging, the Ohio procedure is not illegal because non-voting is not the only component of the process.

User avatar
Joscellin
Posts: 645
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:08 am

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by Joscellin » Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:32 pm

I’m pretty tough on anything that makes it harder to vote, but I can’t really get it up over this one.

Actually seems pretty reasonable? At least unless it’s coupled with an onerous re-registration process.

User avatar
rockathon
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun May 06, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by rockathon » Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:36 pm

Yea this is a tough one. I just don't like how it can disproportionately affect the poor, people who have to move often and democrats. One NPR reporter said this decision can make 20% of Ohio residents ineligible to vote. Something just doesn't taste right.



User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 18811
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by ymmv » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:19 am

Nebby wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:06 am


Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/1 ... 0_3e04.pdf
That summary sure makes the holding sound prima facie ridiculous but then my bias is colored a bit by some of the other ridiculous perceptions US courts / DOJ seem to have of Chinese law and doing business in China.

User avatar
freshy dog
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:54 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by freshy dog » Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:36 pm

elie mystal’s melt down over the gerrymandering decision is not entirely unwarranted, but someone should check on him


User avatar
MKC
Posts: 4530
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:46 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by MKC » Fri Jun 22, 2018 2:36 pm

Supreme Court rules 5-4 that cops need a warrant to get cell phone location information:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/2 ... 2_h315.pdf

I was disappointed Gorsuch dissented until I realized that his dissent was just him taking the opportunity to go ballistic on Katz. (Gorsuch says cops should have to get a warrant to get any information held by third parties for a particular purpose)

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by dcc617 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:32 pm

MKC wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 2:36 pm
Supreme Court rules 5-4 that cops need a warrant to get cell phone location information:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/2 ... 2_h315.pdf

I was disappointed Gorsuch dissented until I realized that his dissent was just him taking the opportunity to go ballistic on Katz. (Gorsuch says cops should have to get a warrant to get any information held by third parties for a particular purpose)
So you should still be disappointed. Gorsuch does attack the third party doctrine, which is Smith and Greenwood, not Katz. His attack on Katz would a pretty big reduction in the scope of the 4th, because Gorsuch wants to only give protection to property, not where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It's good that he wants to consider data like mail, but there are a ton of occasions where Gorsuch's standard would greatly increase the power of police to search.

User avatar
MKC
Posts: 4530
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:46 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by MKC » Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:39 pm

dcc617 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:32 pm
MKC wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 2:36 pm
Supreme Court rules 5-4 that cops need a warrant to get cell phone location information:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/2 ... 2_h315.pdf

I was disappointed Gorsuch dissented until I realized that his dissent was just him taking the opportunity to go ballistic on Katz. (Gorsuch says cops should have to get a warrant to get any information held by third parties for a particular purpose)
So you should still be disappointed. Gorsuch does attack the third party doctrine, which is Smith and Greenwood, not Katz. His attack on Katz would a pretty big reduction in the scope of the 4th, because Gorsuch wants to only give protection to property, not where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It's good that he wants to consider data like mail, but there are a ton of occasions where Gorsuch's standard would greatly increase the power of police to search.
Any examples? I'm not a Fourth Amendment expert by any means, but I like the general bailment theory as he explained it.

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by dcc617 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:00 pm

Okay, so Katz would be an example. That's the one where police couldn't bug a phone booth without a warrant. Another example would be if police wanted to use a satellite to track you all day. That wouldn't be a trespass onto your property, but would be a violation of your reasonable expectation of privacy. Etc.

I'm not opposed to having a Katz and Boyd approach. But Gorsuch wants to cut out Katz and rely only on Boyd.

User avatar
MKC
Posts: 4530
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:46 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by MKC » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:07 pm

dcc617 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:00 pm
Okay, so Katz would be an example. That's the one where police couldn't bug a phone booth without a warrant. Another example would be if police wanted to use a satellite to track you all day. That wouldn't be a trespass onto your property, but would be a violation of your reasonable expectation of privacy. Etc.

I'm not opposed to having a Katz and Boyd approach. But Gorsuch wants to cut out Katz and rely only on Boyd.
As a result, Katz has yielded an often unpredictable—and sometimes unbelievable—jurisprudence. Smith and Miller are only two examples; there are many others.
Take Florida v. Riley, 488 U. S. 445 (1989), which says that a police helicopter hovering 400 feet above a person’s property invades no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Try that one out on your neighbors...

Resorting to Katz in data privacy cases threatens more of the same.
Apparently his interpretation covers aerial surveillance somehow, because he implies he strongly disapproves.

And with regard to a phone booth, I think Gorsuch would say that the contents of the call were transferred to a third party only for the limited purpose of transmitting your voice to another, and that you have a property interest in that content just as you would an email or a sealed letter.

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by dcc617 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Riley was a crazy decision where the Supreme Court said it wasn't a search to go over your property with a helicopter because hypothetically a member of the public could also do that under FAA regulations. That was an intrusion into the defendant's home/curtilage. My example was of a person not in their home, walking around town. That would not be covered by Gorsuch, because there is no trespass. You're in public.

There is not a property conception of Katz. That's why the court had to use reasonable expectations.

Basically, Gorsuch thinks trespass=search. That is significantly narrower than the current doctrine.

ETA So in Katz, cops put a recording device outside of a phone booth to record Katz's conversation. There was no trespass into the phone booth. They didn't get information from the phone company. Also, Katz had no property interest in the phone booth.

Now, if you're saying that it should be private because Katz only wanted to relay his conversation to the recipient, then that is the reasonable expectation of privacy.


User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 18811
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases - Cops cant search vehicle on private property w/o warrant

Post by ymmv » Wed Jun 27, 2018 10:53 am

Slippery slopes may often be red herrings but man it did not take long with this court for the First Amendment to swallow the rest of them whole.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest