View Story | 478 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Juvenile Court. There is a long line of cases that say that students have less rights than adults, but that there has to be reasonalbe suspicion regarding a particularized student before (s)he can be searched. Along comes a case that says that atheletes can be drug tested because they are in a voluntary program and it is for the safety of themselves and the other atheletes. Now the courts are saying that that takes away the need for any individual suspicion-even though the searched students are not engaged in any voluntary activity, in fact they are mandated to go to school. So the drug testing case has metastasized into a tumor that ate away the premise for minimal constitutional protection.
We won our case only because the information that was used-a student said she was scared because she had heard that someone might be bringing a gun to school, was weeks old. Not because there was any verifiable information, or any particularized suspicion to anyone, but because the loose "information" was stale. And the judge said it was a close case.
"I said, 'wait a minute, Chester, you know I'm a peaceful man'". Robbie Robertson
by NearlyNormal on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 06:38:54 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
How do you know a Republican is lying? Ask one: If the Republicans can lower gas prices for 60 days before an election, why won't they do it all the time?
by ca democrat on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 07:01:08 AM PDT
There was the case of Georgia Thompson a Wisconsin woman who had the misfortune of working for a Democratic Governor when the local US Attorney received a call from Washinton telling him that his job was on the line if he didn't help the Republican party. Being a good Federalist Society member, he stepped up to the plate and convicted her of doing her job. She went to jail. Luckily she lives in a state where the local Circuit Court of Appeals is not comprised of Federalist sheep. Not so lucky Don Siegelman, who was convicted of being a Democratic Governor in a Southern State, and whose conviction is unlikely to be overturned by a Circuit Court comprised primarily of loyal Republican Federalists. At least the NYT and others have picked up his case. But it's rather sad, don't you think, that we have such obvious political prisoners in this country. Usually we hide it much better than this.
by Uncle Bob on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 08:34:01 AM PDT
through the privatizing of student loans. The net result is that private companies can now charge students higher rates and penalties, yet still receive the benefit that the loans are government guaranteed.
by ryder92111 on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 08:52:52 AM PDT
housing for any students receiving loans - or all senior's houses who receive Social Security - or all veterans who receive disability care.
Come to think of it, why this should let the government forensically search without cause or warrants any business that receives government contracts, assistance, tax incentives, or subsidies. Maybe this non-ruling should be used to go through Exxon and Halliburton and the Carlyle Group's closets...
"We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." ~ Barack Obama
by Reality Bites Back on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 11:32:07 AM PDT
...what are they but the Queen of Corporate Welfare? Send Office of the Inspector General's staff onto every square inch of Blackwater property - maybe they'll find a few of the pallets of $100 bills that went missing in Iraq.
9-11 changed everything? Well, Katrina changed it back.
by varro on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 02:36:41 PM PDT
by ca democrat on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 09:30:50 AM PDT
These folks weren't dissidents by any means. But their imprisonment helped elect ReTHUGs. The Georgia Thompson case being a most egregious example.
And in the case of Don Siegelman, the Thugs have done exactly what Newt and Hot Tub Tom accused the Democrats of doing to them - making politics illegal. Siegelman's "crime"? Giving a job in his administration to a campaign contributor. By this standard shouldn't every GOP governor AND THE PRESIDENT be in jail? [Of course, at least in pretzel boy's case, he belongs there regardless.]
John McCain: He's not just crazy ... He's BATSHIT CRAZY!
by kbman on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 09:33:11 AM PDT
by ca democrat on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 12:19:22 PM PDT
political prisoners if S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, now introduced in the Senate, passes. It has been referred to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
They are especially worried about the Internet fomenting "problems", and the nebulous wording and open-ended "definitions" are troublesome.
From Democracy Now! article:
A little-noticed anti-terrorism bill quietly making its through Congress is raising fears of a new affront on activism and constitutional rights. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in an overwhelming 400 to six House vote last month. Critics say it could herald a new government crackdown on dissident activity under the guise of fighting terrorism.
Vigilance, vigilance... gotta watch 'em every minute.
by Prognosticator on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 10:16:11 AM PDT
agency can see it for themselves. If it becomes a criminal offense to dissent, then the gov't is itself criminal and deserves to be overthrown by any means necessary. And I'll be there with a pitchfork and a torch.
But the line ought properly be drawn way before it comes to that. When the courts mimic the brownshirts, it's time for a thorough housecleaning of the most radical sort.
-7.25/-6.41 Consumerism is the disease that allows the ruling classes to thrive; therefore, not buying is a political act.
by sravaka on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 07:32:40 PM PDT
couldn't POSSIBLY be guilty. He was investigated and convicted on evidence that was dug up over the course of a year by an investigative reporter in Montgomery--dirt he was digging for a year before the feds indicted him. It was all part of the Scrushy mess, and Scrushy was as guilty as they come, and thank god we finally got some convictions against them. I don't doubt that Scrushy bought his seat on the state hospital board. I also don't doubt that in a lot of ways, this was SOP for politics in Alabama (regardless of party), and Siegelman was doing what everyone else has been doing for a hundred years, and it was just his bad luck to be the whipping boy for everyone else's sins.
Fair? Maybe not. Politically motivated? Possibly. But--I do think there are people more deserving of your sympathy than Don Siegelman.-
Siegelman was out, anyway--using court cases to neutralize him politically was pointless; Bob Riley is not what I want in a ideal governor but (so far) he's not a crook and he hasn't embarrassed us nationally, and he'll probably stay governor for as long as he wants to.
Alabama isn't rich enough to be red.
by highland girl on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 10:51:38 AM PDT
Usually we hide it much better than this.
They're interested in scaring the shit out of all of us. To that end, it's in their interest to make it well known.
Gore to Richardson to Edwards to ?
by creeper on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 05:42:29 PM PDT
Incendiado para arriba, listo para irme.
by gobacktotexas on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 11:05:01 AM PDT
I used to do quite a bit of juvenile defense. The high schools where I practiced mostly had some version of a quick-tipster program: Kids could report to someone at the school (teacher, principal, police liason officer) that another student had contraband in his/her possession. If that report turned out to be correct, the reporting kid could get anywhere from $25-$50 cash on the spot and remain anonymous.
So, if Suzy decides she doesn't like Megan anymore because Megan flirted with her boyfriend, Suzy could just stash a joint into Megan's locker, find a vice-principal and tattle on Megan, get Megan suspended from school at minimum and maybe into juvenile court, and be well on her way towards buying a kewl new purse to boot. Pretty nifty system. This information would never get cops a search warrant from a judge (well, at least not a judge who was paying attention), but it's all perfectly kosher here because they're only kids. We're school officials; we don't need no stinkin' probable cause. Used to drive me nuts.
by classico on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 09:32:14 AM PDT
were still doing searches months after the "report", the Distric Attorney's jaw just dropped. The judges eyes bugged out and I started asking a whole series of questions.
by NearlyNormal on Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 09:43:31 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 478 comments