R
RMCG
- Posts
- 2,050
- Reactions
- 52
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Points
- 48
[YOUTUBE]Klqv9t1zVww[/YOUTUBE]
I found this here:
Although it's never been used, I contend that the United States Senate has the power to act as an appellate court to the Supreme Court, but only in cases where the Supreme Court has made a decision, or failed to act when they had a duty to act, in a manner that would be Treason to the Constitution.
At least mitch daniels vetoed a bill that said cops and the da could keep at least 85% of contraband owned by a criminal. With these two laws in effect I'd think the sound of doors being broken down would be heard statewide. The article said they underhandedly already keep almost 100%, but if the law was passed it would assuredly be 100%. I would hope that law will be overturned rather quickly
mal
After shooting the intruder and he lay dying on my carpet, I'd call the police and claim I thought it was a burgler with a gun.......
I can't ding you with the mad rep again.The entire system is corrupt. They is zero chance for reform. The head of the beast must be severed. The majority of americKans remain silent.
Nazi Germany II is in full swing and right on schedule.
Are you fucking kidding me??? So now the state can invade your person.no warrent blood draws on the side of the road in texas now also ,if i lived in one of these states i would burn down the capatal builing or the suprema court house that passed that fucking law,evelution is coming and i believe they intend to attack the usa again very soon like the sears towers ,so they can continue the war on us ,i mean terriorism ,shoot hillary first ,thenkill the prez ,and string up all the congressmen an d women by they way they voted aganst our civil rights
I just watched that flick the other night. Great movie, The Madness of King George.Jeezus. It's like King George never died...
From what im understanding if you want a US Supreme Court ruling ousted, you have to have Congress either amend the law or how the law reads or amend the Constitution.
What does it matter which "side" made the ruling, really, in the grand scheme of things? Your post only serves to prove what I've been saying for decades--Republicrat, Demoplican--they're simply one leg of the same fucking beast. That beast is entirely still beholden to the same interests, operates in the same manner because it pretty much has only one head.
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against a Kentucky man who was arrested after police burst into his apartment without a search warrant because they smelled marijuana and feared he was trying to get rid of incriminating evidence.
Voting 8-1, the justices reversed a Kentucky Supreme Court ruling that threw out the evidence gathered when officers entered Hollis King's apartment.
The court said there was no violation of King's constitutional rights because the police acted reasonably. Only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented.
Officers knocked on King's door in Lexington and thought they heard noises that indicated whoever was inside was trying to get rid of incriminating evidence.
Justice Samuel Alito said in his opinion for the court that people have no obligation to respond to the knock or, if they do open the door, allow the police to come in. In those cases, officers who wanted to gain entry would have to persuade a judge to issue a search warrant.
But Alito said, "Occupants who choose not to stand on their constitutional rights but instead elect to attempt to destroy evidence have only themselves to blame."
In her dissent, Ginsburg said her colleagues were giving police an easy way to routinely avoid getting warrants in drug cases.
"Police officers may now knock, listen, then break the door down, never mind that they had ample time to obtain a warrant," she said.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?