Re: On the LAM--Local Area Mixes (fwd)

Forwarded message:
First, I knew the answer, I was looking for a lead-in...thanks. Then how, Constitutionaly speaking, do they have get the responsbility to search when it is clearly a judicial responsibility (that is where it is in the Constitution) and in cases such as Evans -v- Gore the Supreme Court has found that the judicial body can't transfer or relinquish it's responsibilities even if it *wants* to? I suspect that, again Constitutionaly speaking, the only system that would pass strict muster would be something similar to the Dutch which prohibit the police from executing a search until *after* review by a legislative representative. This is a rhetorical question, I don't expect you or anyone else to respond to it. Just think about it... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

At 08:44 PM 1/22/98 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
Going and doing stuff is an Executive Branch function; enforcing laws is an Executive Branch function. Issuing the warrant allowing the police to go search or arrest someone is a judicial function, and is generally done on request by the police or prosecutors. In the case of early-60s New York, of course, it simply wasn't bothered with. :-)
Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
participants (2)
-
Bill Stewart
-
Jim Choate