Do we need a national ID plan?
Anonymous
cripto at ecn.org
Mon Jul 22 19:10:54 PDT 2002
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:22:34 -0700, you wrote:
>
> Wouldn't this requirement violate the probable cause requirement for seizures
> of a person which been defined by a series of cases, beginning with Terry v. Ohio
> , 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)?
>
> steve
You are quite idealistic. Neither the Constitution nor case law matters. Neither constrains the
behavior of law enforcement.
http://www.aclu.org/news/2002/n022002c.html
"ACLU of CO Sues Federal and State Law Enforcement
Agencies Over Illegal SWAT Raid on Family
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ednesday, February 20, 2002
DENVER--The American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado filed a lawsuit today alleging that federal
and state law enforcement agents violated the constitutional rights of a Pueblo family when they
conducted an illegal SWAT-type raid on the family's home with no warrant or other legal authority.
Once again, the war on drugs misses the target and instead scores a direct hit on the
Constitution, said Mark Silverstein, Legal Director of the ACLU of Colorado. These government
agents had no search warrant, no arrest warrant, and no lawful authority whatsoever.
They carried out this armed home invasion in flagrant disregard of the Fourth Amendment, which
forbids unreasonable searches and arrests without probable cause.
According to the ACLU lawsuit, which was filed on behalf of Dan and Rosa Unis and their two
college-aged sons, on August 19, 2000, the family was peacefully enjoying the privacy of their
home when black-masked, black-helmeted men brandishing automatic weapons and wearing all-black
uniforms with no insignias suddenly burst into the house unannounced, kicked the family's dog
across the floor and ordered the entire family to "get on the fucking floor." "
Don't forget to be patriotic.
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy
mailing list