Police being reigned in by the Court

[SavannahMann]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

 

[excalibur]

It applies to misdemeanors and they sent it back to a lower court. It basically maintains the Court's status quo.

 

[Godboy]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

You want a rule that says that criminals wont be prosecuted if they are able to get inside their house before being arrested?

 

[SavannahMann]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

You want a rule that says that criminals wont be prosecuted if they are able to get inside their house before being arrested?

No. I want a strong Fourth Amendment.

 

[shockedcanadian]

I've said this before, democracy and liberty is difficult work. You have to decide "do we have a Constitution and individual liberty and protections or do we have Canada"?

If you choose the latter, you must understand where your economy and freedom will lie. On the bottom of a lake somewhere.

Choose the former. Accept that it may not be cool that sometimes bad guys (or people who simply did a bad thing or two) get away with their actions, but it's a far better scenario than power without limitations

 

[JoeMoma]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

The only way this ruling makes sense to me is if the cops didn't turn on his lights in time for the driver of the car to know he was to pull over.

 

[Godboy]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

You want a rule that says that criminals wont be prosecuted if they are able to get inside their house before being arrested?

You believe its unreasonable for an officer to arrest someone who evades them long enough to get inside their home?

 

[22lcidw]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

You want a rule that says that criminals wont be prosecuted if they are able to get inside their house before being arrested?

No. I want a strong Fourth Amendment.

A lot of what you say can depend on how the police react. There was a time they were more active in helping someone in a situation instead of making a score. They can provide a wide cushion in a nation with law enforcement code books that can make a citizen a criminal for near anything.

 

[SavannahMann]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

The only way this ruling makes sense to me is if the cops didn't turn on his lights in time for the driver of the car to know he was to pull over.

The court is saying that we are talking about a Misdemeanor. We aren’t talking rape. Robbery. Murder or mayhem. The charge the cop used to claim hot pursuit was failure to stop. A misdemeanor. We have to draw the line somewhere. And the Court says that that line is the crime the suspect is believed to have committed.

Every game has rules. And the rules for this game are laid out in the Constitution.

 

[Godboy]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

You want a rule that says that criminals wont be prosecuted if they are able to get inside their house before being arrested?

No. I want a strong Fourth Amendment.

A lot of what you say can depend on how the police react. There was a time they were more active in helping someone in a situation instead of making a score. They can provide a wide cushion in a nation with law enforcement code books that can make a citizen a criminal for near anything.

Nah, ive never been charged with a crime i didnt commit.

 

[SavannahMann]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

You want a rule that says that criminals wont be prosecuted if they are able to get inside their house before being arrested?

You believe its unreasonable for an officer to arrest someone who evades them long enough to get inside their home?

I believe it is unreasonable to claim “Hot Pursuit” for a misdemeanor exception to the Fourth Amendment.

But for the sake of argument. Where do we draw the line if not as Misdemeanor’s? A cop sees a guy park illegally and run into a house. The cop chases him down and kicks in the door? Where do we draw the line?

 

[JGalt]

As the power of law-enforcement continues to decline, the crime rate will continue to increase. We're already seeing that dramatically happen.

Life isn't some magic fairyland where everything is fair. It wasn't meant to be.

 

[Muhammed]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

The only way this ruling makes sense to me is if the cops didn't turn on his lights in time for the driver of the car to know he was to pull over.

He was parked in his garage and not a threat.

 

[Muhammed]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

It's got nothing to do with the "summer of rage", you lowlife scumbag.

You're just trying to make excuses for terrorists because you're a piece of shit.

 

[SavannahMann]

As the power of law-enforcement continues to decline, the crime rate will continue to increase.

Life isn't some magic fairyland where everything is fair. It wasn't meant to be.

You are right. But not in the way I suspect you think. It was supposed to be hard to convict someone. The police were supposed to have a warrant before entering a private residence or office. Fourth Amendment. But right away we started up with the exceptions. And the exceptions added up. And we found ourselves basing exceptions on exceptions that were in turn based on exceptions.

Remember a few years ago. The Louisiana Supreme Court said the suspect did not ask for a lawyer when he said. “Give me a Lawyer Dog.”

They found an exception. Created it out of thin air. And everyone on the Right was happy. A Criminal went to prison instead of set free based upon a technicality.

A few short years after the case in North Carolina that encouraged cops to be ignorant of the law so they could claim they didn’t know they were enforcing non existent laws. The Supreme Court now expects cops to show restraint.

Heien v. North Carolina - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

It’s gone from giving the officer the benefit of the doubt to expect the officer to do the job Constitutionally.

 

[JoeMoma]

Failure to stop for a blue light is a serious offense even is only a misdemeanor. According to a google the penalty can be a $500 fine and up or 90 days to 3 years for the first offense. In some places it is a felony for the second offense.

 

[JoeMoma]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

The only way this ruling makes sense to me is if the cops didn't turn on his lights in time for the driver of the car to know he was to pull over.

He was parked in his garage and not a threat.

Being a threat is not the issue.

 

[SavannahMann]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

It's got nothing to do with the "summer of rage", you lowlife scumbag.

You're just trying to make excuses for terrorists because you're a piece of shit.

Really. As recently as 2017 the courts were bending over backwards to give the cops anything they want. This session they have been denying the cops pretty much every challenge.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-157_8mjp.pdf

How about the decision to limit Qualified Immunity?

Woman Shot by Police Wins Supreme Court Seizure Case (2)

A woman who was shot by police but got away won her U.S. Supreme Court case over what it means to be seized under the Fourth Amendment.

news.bloomberglaw.com

The call of the day since the riots and exposure of rampant police misconduct has been accountability and restrictions.

How else to you explain the sudden shift in the rulings of the Court?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.” ibid

Good.

But there’s still a long way to go to defend the rights enshrined in the Fourth Amendment from abuse by government.

 

[JGalt]

The fallout of the summer of rage 2020 has been more people questioning the claims and actions of the police. Further the courts are even starting to reign in excessive actions.

Supreme Court declines to expand police power to enter home without warrant

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to grant police more authority to enter the home of a fleeing suspect following a minor offense.The unanimous ruling adopts a legal test that involves weighi…

thehill.com

Here is the story. A cop saw a guy who he thought was driving under the influence. The cop puts on the lights. The guy drives on another hundred yards and pulls into his garage. The automatic door starts closing. The cop runs and ducks under the door.

The argument made by prosecutors was that this was an exception to the Fourth Amendment. The officer was in Hot Pursuit.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously and said no.

All nine Justices. All of them said no. The cops can’t claim that on a simple misdemeanor.

For most of my life the Supreme Court has been a rubber stamp. Approving pretty much anything the cops want to do. Now after all the misconduct and abuses are being exposed the Courts are reigning in the Cops. It wasn’t that long ago the Court said the Cops traffic stop was legal even if he was enforcing a non existent law.

Now. The cops had better start thinking more conservatively about their power and authority. It seems the Supremes don’t play that.

The article says that the case will now return to California state court for further proceedings. The guy was three times over the legal limit and could have killed someone.

I would be surprised if the lower court threw out his conviction.