This is fantastic news, and proves what me and others have been saying for a long time. "In place of the Fourth Amendment, the people are expected to defer to the executive branch and its representation that it will authorize such surveillance only when appropriate." The government "is asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation that would deprive it of any real meaning. The court declines to do so," Aiken [the judge] said. ...and you know what's most ironic? The lawsuit that led to this ruling started when a Muslim lawyer's, "...law offices were secretly broken into by the FBI, his clients' files at his office were searched, his business and personal computers were secretly copied, his telephone was wiretapped and his home was bugged.".
Whoops, http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/26/patriot.act/index.html It's related to the Brandon Mayfield case.
Great News Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Can we impeach them yet? Even BR must be looking forward to the day Hillary is in office and he no longer has to see Republicans running this country into the ground. Without very many Republicans around no more stories of (R) soliciting young male interns or offering a suck service at the local airport. Then Republicans can go back to church and dream about what a great President that senile actor Reagan was.... Michael Approximately 80% of our air pollution stems from hydrocarbons released by vegetation, so let's not go overboard in setting and enforcing tough emission standards from man-made sources. Ronald Reagan surely a man among men, far ahead of his times .. .. .. far far ... far ahead...times .. mama... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The ruling was in a decision not to dismiss a suit brought by Mayfield, She justified her decision by going to the Fourth Amendment, now lets see what the actual facts of the case were, some one in law enforcement misread a finger print, and that misread identified Mayfield, so they placed him under surveillance, so far nothing I see shows that there wasn't a warrant, or that a warrant wasn't obtained, in fact; Read the story, a warrant was obtained, the point being accused was that it was done in a fraudulent manner. Here is the crux of the case; A mistake was made, but the evidence was shown to the Judge, to obtain a warrant, and eventually the evidence was straightened out, and the mistake was recognized, and Mr. Mayfield was compensated, but now he is being greedy, and like all liberals he wraps himself in the Constitution to justify that Greed.
Yeah, the criminals use the Constitution and the Bill of Rights on a regular basis to be able to commit crimes and get away with it. Baron Max
