←back to thread

574 points nh43215rgb | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
AvAn12 ◴[] No.45783491[source]
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution: > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Ice can say what they want. The Constitution is the ultimate law of the land here.

Oh yeah, and facial recognition does not work to anything like this degree of accuracy, and probably never can. Nice try.

replies(9): >>45783592 #>>45783618 #>>45783672 #>>45784224 #>>45784411 #>>45784558 #>>45785264 #>>45785905 #>>45790935 #
fragmede ◴[] No.45783592[source]
The supreme court interprets the laws, including the constitution, and they've decided that being brown is sufficient reasonability.
replies(2): >>45784755 #>>45785109 #
1. estearum ◴[] No.45784755[source]
Nope they didn't decide that. It's actually even worse!

A lot of Americans have the impression that SCOTUS keeps deciding in the administration's favor, but this is not true.

SCOTUS is saying: "We're not going to hear this case right now, but we likely will in the future. In the meantime, we are going to overturn the lower court who did actually hear the case and allow the administration to continue its actions. No, we will not explain we think the lower court got wrong."

Increasingly these SCOTUS orders totally unexplained which is a blatant violation of their judicial obligations, and they are frequently unsigned by the majority (conservative) Justices. Presumably because they don't want their names written on papers that they know will be understood by future generations to be totally indefensible.

SCOTUS has proven itself functionally incapable of fulfilling its Constitutional duties and has proven that we need a lot more Justices. If you don't have the time to hear the cases we need you to hear, then the court needs to be scaled up and we can pick random panels to hear different cases.

Nothing to do with policy disagreements (how would any American even know if they had a policy disagreement with an unexplained, unsigned SCOTUS order?) – we just need courts that can decide on things that are important to our country.