Someone challenges the Patriot Act on Constitutional grounds. The case is brought to the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rules 9-0 unanimously that the Patriot Act is legal and valid under the Constitution.
After their ruling, is the Patriot Act unconstitutional or not?
I don't care if it's logical or right. Again, I'm offering no opinion on the virtue of the Patriot Act. I'm saying that its enforcement is not a criminal act. Slavery in the first 70 years of the United States wasn't right, but that didn't make it criminal.
The SCOTUS is comprised of human beings, fallible human beings. If the SCOTUS doesn't find the Patriot Act unconstitutional, that doesn't mean it isn't. It just means the courts don't recognize it. The Patriot Act blows a huge hole in the 4th amendment and any law that weakens the constitution so completely is by definition unconstitutional, whether the courts recognize that or not.
"I don't care if it's logical or right."
If that's the case, your argument bears no merit, because the constitutionality of the Patriot Act pivots on being right and logical. You're taking a terrible stance that the law is infallible until the court deems it illegal. That's a dangerous standard to follow. If a law doesn't protect the liberty of the people and serve it's common welfare, it is a law that should not be. Laws are written by fallible human beings, so logically laws are fallible and should be put to question when they don't meet the standard for liberty and welfare of the people.
I think everyone understands that, technically, if the supreme court says its constitutional then the law will treat is such. It's kinda weak to argue something, claim you don't actually care, but continue to argue it anyway just because you know for a "fact" that you can't technically be proven wrong. You may not technically be wrong tom, but.... well, I'll just bring another lebowski quote into the mix
I don't care if it's logical or right. Again, I'm offering no opinion on the virtue of the Patriot Act. I'm saying that its enforcement is not a criminal act. Slavery in the first 70 years of the United States wasn't right, but that didn't make it criminal.
it is clear that you dont care, but the fact that you are taking a defensive stance on behalf of the patriot act says a lot about your opinion on its virtue.
Anyway, back to the topic at hand. The US government could solve the debt problem in a few years if it started issuing it's own currency that isn't born out of debt, abolishing the federal reserve, and outlawing fractional reserve banking/usury. To persist in the fantasy that the central banks stabilize the economy will doom us to another depression, which the banks are already working to ignite. The truth is, the banks created every single economic disaster in American history, they've flat out admitted it. The default threat is just some political theater to keep the "honorable" men in congress looking like heroes.
But can you spot the logical difference between not being able to yell fire in a theater, carry military-grade weapons, and the government being able to invade your privacy?
I certainly can. But since I'm not a suspected terrorist, why would the government be wasting its time invading my privacy? I mean, it's not like the presence of the 4th Amendment is keeping them from doing it anyway, is it?
it is clear that you dont care, but the fact that you are taking a defensive stance on behalf of the patriot act says a lot about your opinion on its virtue.
I don't care about the Patriot Act. I think the only real concern is the proverbial slippery slope, that the acceptance of the act will lead to future loss of privacy across all circumstances and not just for suspected terrorists. But I also think that's very unlikely to occur, as there's no practical incentive for the government to hire millions of people to monitor everyone's communication when only an infinitesimally small amount of what they would hear is relevant to their interests.
I certainly can. But since I'm not a suspected terrorist, why would the government be wasting its time invading my privacy? I mean, it's not like the presence of the 4th Amendment is keeping them from doing it anyway, is it?
It's all about accountability. If they can be held to legal scrutiny over the things they do, it modifies their behavior as opposed to having carte blanche to do whatever they please.
"why would the government be wasting its time invading my privacy?"
Why indeed? Perhaps like the war on drugs, it's profitable to make as many people out as criminals as legally possible? Lot's of people profit. Corporate jails, law enforcement agencies, lawyers, etc. They all get a cut of the Patriot Act's action. They don't need a reason to suspect, only a need to maintain the security theater and if you're expendable, they'll sacrifice you to that purpose.
I think everyone understands that, technically, if the supreme court says its constitutional then the law will treat is such. It's kinda weak to argue something, claim you don't actually care, but continue to argue it anyway just because you know for a "fact" that you can't technically be proven wrong. You may not technically be wrong tom, but.... well, I'll just bring another lebowski quote into the mix
I assure you, I really don't give a shit. I'm a Gore/Kerry/Obama voter who watches the Daily Show four nights a week, you know? Not exactly big on conservative anti-terror policies, and I find things like the TSA's "enhanced" patdown bullshit to be the very definition of a violation of the 4th Amendment.
The Patriot Act just isn't nearly as relevant to my life. Is someone on the FBI, for whom hunting terrorists is priority number 1, going to spend his day reading through my Gmail? He's going to go far at the agency by telling his boss that Tom Dunne in Kentucky has some offers for Pizza Hut, a bunch of messages from his wife and a notice from his car dealer that he's due for an oil change in his email account.
If the FBI had any incentive to actually violate my privacy as a result of this law, I would care. But they don't. I'm boring, I've no value to them. Honestly, even if the FBI could randomly peer into every email, text and phone call you make, why would they bother? I just don't see that it's something worth worrying about.
It's all about accountability. If they can be held to legal scrutiny over the things they do, it modifies their behavior as opposed to having carte blanche to do whatever they please.
"why would the government be wasting its time invading my privacy?"
Why indeed? Perhaps like the war on drugs, it's profitable to make as many people out as criminals as legally possible? Lot's of people profit. Corporate jails, law enforcement agencies, lawyers, etc. They all get a cut of the Patriot Act's action. They don't need a reason to suspect, only a need to maintain the security theater and if you're expendable, they'll sacrifice you to that purpose.
Sure, I see. And then they arrest me and then they put me in jail. And now, instead of getting taxes from my $70,000 job or my $300,000 home, they get fuckall from me because I'm removed from the work force. Imprisoning innocent tax payers in order to profit, it's genius. I mean, what could go wrong?
Actually forget that. That's me being snarky and it's not really pertinent. Let me ask you this: if we have a government so evil, literally evil, that they will sacrifice innocent citizens to obtain their goals, then what's the 4th Amendment going to do? It's a paper shield, not a real one, and if the governemnt is actually so diabolical that they are willing to imprison me on trumped up charges, screaming "4th Amendment!" as they haul me away isn't going to change anything, Patriot Act or not.
Honestly, if you think corporate jails, law enforcement agencies, and lawyers are all willing to sacrifice you to turn a profit, what do you think the Bill of Rights is going to do to protect you? If they're already willing to lie to imprison you, why wouldn't they lie to avoid the 4th Amendment as well?
i am glad you get the picture about the future loss of privacy.
but like you said, you personally are of no interest to the government because of your profile.
but, what about millions of others in the country and any one of them could be wrongfully profiled(because of their race/religion/country of birth etc.) and jailed and then later released because the gov couldnt find anything on him. there have been lot of cases like this. i hope you give a shit about people like them who are wrongfully accused/procecuted because of this act.
btw, being a obama voter is the same as a bush voter. both obama and bush are part of the same criminal league of politicians waging illegal wars and contributing to our debt.
I assure you, I really don't give a shit. I'm a Gore/Kerry/Obama voter who watches the Daily Show four nights a week, you know? Not exactly big on conservative anti-terror policies, and I find things like the TSA's "enhanced" patdown bullshit to be the very definition of a violation of the 4th Amendment.
The Patriot Act just isn't nearly as relevant to my life. Is someone on the FBI, for whom hunting terrorists is priority number 1, going to spend his day reading through my Gmail? He's going to go far at the agency by telling his boss that Tom Dunne in Kentucky has some offers for Pizza Hut, a bunch of messages from his wife and a notice from his car dealer that he's due for an oil change in his email account.
If the FBI had any incentive to actually violate my privacy as a result of this law, I would care. But they don't. I'm boring, I've no value to them. Honestly, even if the FBI could randomly peer into every email, text and phone call you make, why would they bother? I just don't see that it's something worth worrying about.
And thus appears the "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" logic. The content of your life is immaterial to the issue that they do violate our 4th amendment rights. You should be upset that it's allowed at all, not just when it happens to you personally.
btw, being a obama voter is the same as a bush voter. both obama and bush are part of the same criminal league of politicians waging illegal wars and contributing to our debt.
No one, and I mean NO ONE, voted for Barack Obama because he was like George Bush. The fact that he has been a disappointment as President while continuing to implement Bush policies is hindsight. No one who pulled a lever or punched a chad for Obama in 2008 had any inkling whatsoever that he'd do anything like that.
*edit*
Do you have any source that can show that "millions" of people have been detained and released on the basis of the Patriot Act? That number seems extraordinarily high to me.
And thus appears the "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" logic. The content of your life is immaterial to the issue that they do violate our 4th amendment rights. You should be upset that it's allowed at all, not just when it happens to you personally.
I find it ironic when personal freedom advocates tell me what I 'should' think or what I 'should' do.
No one, and I mean NO ONE, voted for Barack Obama because he was like George Bush. The fact that he has been a disappointment as President while continuing to implement Bush policies is hindsight. No one who pulled a lever or punched a chad for Obama in 2008 had any inkling whatsoever that he'd do anything like that.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. I for one, knew that ahead of his election. I didn't vote for him nor McCain. I voted for an independent candidate. Whether or not that person would truly serve the public good is speculative at best, but it wasn't clear that they were in bed with same people Obama and McCain are with.
What started this discussion was someone upthread referring to the Patriot Act as a criminal act. Criminal, meaning a violation of our legal system - that's clearly a matter of law, yes? That's the only part that interests me, as I thought maybe the original poster had recently seen or read something about the Patriot Act that I hadn't heard.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. I for one, knew that ahead of his election. I didn't vote for him nor McCain. I voted for an independent candidate. Whether or not that person would truly serve the public good is speculative at best, but it wasn't clear that they were in bed with same people Obama and McCain are with.
It's great that you had such foresight. Too bad your vote didn't accomplish anything in America's two party system.
And before you start, I am not a fan of the political party structure. I can quote verbatim from memory the portion of George Washington's farewell address in which he warns the nation about the perils of a political party system. Despite that, it's the reality we live with, and I choose the lesser of two perceived evils.
No one, and I mean NO ONE, voted for Barack Obama because he was like George Bush. The fact that he has been a disappointment as President while continuing to implement Bush policies is hindsight. No one who pulled a lever or punched a chad for Obama in 2008 had any inkling whatsoever that he'd do anything like that.
*edit*
Do you have any source that can show that "millions" of people have been detained and released on the basis of the Patriot Act? That number seems extraordinarily high to me.
well i am sure the some of the people from Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan voted for Obama knowing he would be the same as bush since basically corporations like those want the status quo to be unchanged.
as for millions of people, read what i wrote. there are millions of people who have a different profile than you and ANY ONE OF THEM can be profiled based on race/religion etc.
To say that something is legal or illegal because it's a law is a joke.
I'm sorry for double replying here, but... what?? Something is illegal completely and entirely because a law proscribes it. It's the literal definition of the word 'illegal'.
If you intend to say that the accepted English definition of the word 'illegal' isn't valid, that's the joke. I like semantics, but I'm fucking well not going to pretend that red is blue because the accepted definition of red doesn't suit your argument.
well i am sure the some of the people from Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan voted for Obama knowing he would be the same as bush since basically corporations like those want the status quo to be unchanged.
as for millions of people, read what i wrote. there are millions of people who have a different profile than you and ANY ONE OF THEM can be profiled based on race/religion etc.
Racial profiling is a different problem. You're right though, that doesn't affect me. So, I guess all I can say is that I'm sorry you're brown and have an odd name while living in America, I imagine that's a pain. It's been that way here for hundreds of years, unfortunately it seems to come with the territory.
Yeah. But it doesn't matter if people can get away with breaking the law. If you have power, or money, you get away with it. If you're a prole, you don't.
It's an incredibly simple concept. You're the one using semantics. I'm describing reality, i.e. what actually happens in real life.
As I said, I *like* semantics. But I'm still not using the word illegal to mean anything except 'against the law'.
You said people with power and money can get away with breaking the law, and that's reality. If that's the case, what does the Patriot Act matter? If powerful people want to monitor your communication, they can do it and get away with it anyway, right? If you repeal the Patriot Act, those people are still rich and powerful, and they can still do what they want. Isn't that your point?
This is just arguing over a grain of sand while ignoring the beach. Let it go.
I agree completely. I literally was just curious what RexM meant when he said "The patriot act is a criminal act by our government." Didn't know if there had been recent news regarding overturning more provisions or something interesting that I had missed.
Replies
The SCOTUS is comprised of human beings, fallible human beings. If the SCOTUS doesn't find the Patriot Act unconstitutional, that doesn't mean it isn't. It just means the courts don't recognize it. The Patriot Act blows a huge hole in the 4th amendment and any law that weakens the constitution so completely is by definition unconstitutional, whether the courts recognize that or not.
"I don't care if it's logical or right."
If that's the case, your argument bears no merit, because the constitutionality of the Patriot Act pivots on being right and logical. You're taking a terrible stance that the law is infallible until the court deems it illegal. That's a dangerous standard to follow. If a law doesn't protect the liberty of the people and serve it's common welfare, it is a law that should not be. Laws are written by fallible human beings, so logically laws are fallible and should be put to question when they don't meet the standard for liberty and welfare of the people.
[ame]
it is clear that you dont care, but the fact that you are taking a defensive stance on behalf of the patriot act says a lot about your opinion on its virtue.
I certainly can. But since I'm not a suspected terrorist, why would the government be wasting its time invading my privacy? I mean, it's not like the presence of the 4th Amendment is keeping them from doing it anyway, is it?
I don't care about the Patriot Act. I think the only real concern is the proverbial slippery slope, that the acceptance of the act will lead to future loss of privacy across all circumstances and not just for suspected terrorists. But I also think that's very unlikely to occur, as there's no practical incentive for the government to hire millions of people to monitor everyone's communication when only an infinitesimally small amount of what they would hear is relevant to their interests.
It's all about accountability. If they can be held to legal scrutiny over the things they do, it modifies their behavior as opposed to having carte blanche to do whatever they please.
"why would the government be wasting its time invading my privacy?"
Why indeed? Perhaps like the war on drugs, it's profitable to make as many people out as criminals as legally possible? Lot's of people profit. Corporate jails, law enforcement agencies, lawyers, etc. They all get a cut of the Patriot Act's action. They don't need a reason to suspect, only a need to maintain the security theater and if you're expendable, they'll sacrifice you to that purpose.
I assure you, I really don't give a shit. I'm a Gore/Kerry/Obama voter who watches the Daily Show four nights a week, you know? Not exactly big on conservative anti-terror policies, and I find things like the TSA's "enhanced" patdown bullshit to be the very definition of a violation of the 4th Amendment.
The Patriot Act just isn't nearly as relevant to my life. Is someone on the FBI, for whom hunting terrorists is priority number 1, going to spend his day reading through my Gmail? He's going to go far at the agency by telling his boss that Tom Dunne in Kentucky has some offers for Pizza Hut, a bunch of messages from his wife and a notice from his car dealer that he's due for an oil change in his email account.
If the FBI had any incentive to actually violate my privacy as a result of this law, I would care. But they don't. I'm boring, I've no value to them. Honestly, even if the FBI could randomly peer into every email, text and phone call you make, why would they bother? I just don't see that it's something worth worrying about.
Sure, I see. And then they arrest me and then they put me in jail. And now, instead of getting taxes from my $70,000 job or my $300,000 home, they get fuckall from me because I'm removed from the work force. Imprisoning innocent tax payers in order to profit, it's genius. I mean, what could go wrong?
Actually forget that. That's me being snarky and it's not really pertinent. Let me ask you this: if we have a government so evil, literally evil, that they will sacrifice innocent citizens to obtain their goals, then what's the 4th Amendment going to do? It's a paper shield, not a real one, and if the governemnt is actually so diabolical that they are willing to imprison me on trumped up charges, screaming "4th Amendment!" as they haul me away isn't going to change anything, Patriot Act or not.
Honestly, if you think corporate jails, law enforcement agencies, and lawyers are all willing to sacrifice you to turn a profit, what do you think the Bill of Rights is going to do to protect you? If they're already willing to lie to imprison you, why wouldn't they lie to avoid the 4th Amendment as well?
but like you said, you personally are of no interest to the government because of your profile.
but, what about millions of others in the country and any one of them could be wrongfully profiled(because of their race/religion/country of birth etc.) and jailed and then later released because the gov couldnt find anything on him. there have been lot of cases like this. i hope you give a shit about people like them who are wrongfully accused/procecuted because of this act.
btw, being a obama voter is the same as a bush voter. both obama and bush are part of the same criminal league of politicians waging illegal wars and contributing to our debt.
anyways, back to topic.
And thus appears the "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" logic. The content of your life is immaterial to the issue that they do violate our 4th amendment rights. You should be upset that it's allowed at all, not just when it happens to you personally.
No one, and I mean NO ONE, voted for Barack Obama because he was like George Bush. The fact that he has been a disappointment as President while continuing to implement Bush policies is hindsight. No one who pulled a lever or punched a chad for Obama in 2008 had any inkling whatsoever that he'd do anything like that.
*edit*
Do you have any source that can show that "millions" of people have been detained and released on the basis of the Patriot Act? That number seems extraordinarily high to me.
I find it ironic when personal freedom advocates tell me what I 'should' think or what I 'should' do.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. I for one, knew that ahead of his election. I didn't vote for him nor McCain. I voted for an independent candidate. Whether or not that person would truly serve the public good is speculative at best, but it wasn't clear that they were in bed with same people Obama and McCain are with.
What started this discussion was someone upthread referring to the Patriot Act as a criminal act. Criminal, meaning a violation of our legal system - that's clearly a matter of law, yes? That's the only part that interests me, as I thought maybe the original poster had recently seen or read something about the Patriot Act that I hadn't heard.
It's great that you had such foresight. Too bad your vote didn't accomplish anything in America's two party system.
And before you start, I am not a fan of the political party structure. I can quote verbatim from memory the portion of George Washington's farewell address in which he warns the nation about the perils of a political party system. Despite that, it's the reality we live with, and I choose the lesser of two perceived evils.
well i am sure the some of the people from Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan voted for Obama knowing he would be the same as bush since basically corporations like those want the status quo to be unchanged.
as for millions of people, read what i wrote. there are millions of people who have a different profile than you and ANY ONE OF THEM can be profiled based on race/religion etc.
I'm sorry for double replying here, but... what?? Something is illegal completely and entirely because a law proscribes it. It's the literal definition of the word 'illegal'.
il·le·gal
/ɪˈligəl/ Show Spelled[ih-lee-guhl] Show IPA
adjective
1. forbidden by law or statute.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/illegal
If you intend to say that the accepted English definition of the word 'illegal' isn't valid, that's the joke. I like semantics, but I'm fucking well not going to pretend that red is blue because the accepted definition of red doesn't suit your argument.
Racial profiling is a different problem. You're right though, that doesn't affect me. So, I guess all I can say is that I'm sorry you're brown and have an odd name while living in America, I imagine that's a pain. It's been that way here for hundreds of years, unfortunately it seems to come with the territory.
As I said, I *like* semantics. But I'm still not using the word illegal to mean anything except 'against the law'.
You said people with power and money can get away with breaking the law, and that's reality. If that's the case, what does the Patriot Act matter? If powerful people want to monitor your communication, they can do it and get away with it anyway, right? If you repeal the Patriot Act, those people are still rich and powerful, and they can still do what they want. Isn't that your point?
I agree completely. I literally was just curious what RexM meant when he said "The patriot act is a criminal act by our government." Didn't know if there had been recent news regarding overturning more provisions or something interesting that I had missed.