US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4106

On June 22 2016 04:30 Lord Tolkien wrote:



The decision effectively legalizes illegal searches. Normally, an illegal search means that the chain of events resulting from the search, INCLUDING the acquisition of the warrant that would be used to justify the search, is void/tainted. If he was not illegally stopped and asked for ID, then the officer would not have found the warrant that would justify the search for evidence, and could not have have justification for a more invasive search: the chain of events cannot occur without the search. That is fundamentally what the exclusionary rule is about.

It does require the officer be operating under "good faith" and only having conducted it out of "negligence", but honestly, the claim of negligence can be so readily used to justify almost any stop and readily used as cover for abuses of power, which is fundamentally what the Fourth Amendment is trying to protect us from.

Allowing "breaches of convenience" is a really bad idea here.


It's a massive loophole they've added to something that could've been uncontroversial (Utah SC ruled unanimously to strike down the evidence), though the Fourth has been worn down quite abit. But ARGH. All of the possibilities for police to target racial minorities and poor communities that this opens up.

It's times like this when I miss Scalia. He would've written a fiery dissent condemning the court for this.

The Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation was among the organizations breached by suspected Russian hackers in a dragnet of the U.S. political apparatus ahead of the November election, according to three people familiar with the matter.

The attacks on the foundation’s network, as well as those of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, compound concerns about her digital security even as the FBI continues to investigate her use of a personal e-mail server while she was secretary of state.

Clinton Foundation officials said the organization hadn’t been notified of the breach and declined to comment further. The compromise of the foundation’s computers was first identified by government investigators as recently as last week, the people familiar with the matter said. Agents monitor servers used by hackers to communicate with their targets, giving them a back channel view of attacks, often even before the victims detect them. [...]

The thefts set the stage for what could be a Washington remake of the public shaming that shook Sony in 2014, when thousands of inflammatory internal e-mails filled with gossip about world leaders and Hollywood stars were made public. Donor information and opposition research on Trump purportedly stolen from the Democratic Party has surfaced online, and the culprit has threatened to publish thousands more documents.