In these cases the global nature of the internet is irrelevant…
…as the BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS involved are between customer and provider within that state. It is rarely, if ever, otherwise.
That a customer can then access resources worldwide doesn't erase the fact that the purchase and sale was between two entities almost always in the same jurisdiction at that time.
The only argument that shuts these guys up is this:
Weaken encryption in the U.S. and all exports of software and network-related technology "made in U.S.A."will dry up. Everybody, Americans included, will shop elsewhere for tech.
That's trillions of dollars in new trade deficits, hundreds of billions in lost profits to tech industries and tens of billions in lost taxes every year until a new administration undoes the damage and stops the bleeding.
Arguing about security and rights of the American people has no effect on these clowns because they hold the public in contempt and always will. Show them what effect their dumb- ass meddling will do to their billionaire friends and corporate backers and they'll quietly let the issue die off without ever having to admit why it was a stupid idea to start with.
[Yes, I've said it before; and I'll say it again every time. ;]
…damages were repaired when declaratory relief was granted; so the 'judicial officer' can't be sued again for the deed. ____________________________________________________________ § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. ____________________________________________________________ [So, The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals covered his six.]
HOWEVER, he CAN face sanctions by his Law Society for bringing the Administration of Justice into Severe Disrepute in that state. ;]
On a military mission, outside the country, involving unidentified suspects during the commission of a crime, and using military equipment designed for precisely that purpose; warrants are irrelevant because they don't exist under that legal jurisdiction. It's a military search.
Don't forget that the DRT box is designed for this usage and no court anywhere in the world has ever challenged field use of field tech by the U.S. military for military operations.
What you, in effect, are saying is that if the U.S. tracked and then droned a terrorist while he was shooting at troops or planting bombs, it would become illegal after the fact if that corpse is later found to be an American terror tourist.
Like I said earlier; show any court case which takes away a legitimate use of tracking tech by the Coast Guard on patrol. It hasn't happened never will because THAT use by THOSE personnel in THAT jurisdiction for THAT purpose is legal. You must overcome THOSE and all three THATs to prevail in court, which is the only venue for balancing law under the Constitution.
Constitutional law is a foundation, NOT AN ABSOLUTE RULING. Reasonable limits apply to all constitutional rights and all courts are tasked with keeping those limits in order. The Constitution exists offshore but does not apply to this.
…because the pursuers are soldiers in a military unit carrying out military missions hundreds of miles away from those borders, and people they find and pursue are not identified as citizens of any nation until they are arrested and brought into custody.
And no; no time is wasted on identification during an active pursuit beyond what is necessary to ensure capture and arrest. It is not legally required and could incur unnecessary risk.
I am in a good position to know, having worn a uniform myself. Relative jurisdictions of military and civilian law is central to Basic and General Military Training in all established and legally mature military organizations. This is especially true for nations which tend to lead most international peacekeeping missions.
Constitutional law is a foundation, not an absolute ruling. Reasonable limits apply to all constitutional rights and all courts are tasked with keeping those limits in order.
Even if suspects later turn out to be American, tracking and pursuit in international waters during the act of smuggling remains legal and unassailable in court; partly because they are not yet identified and mostly because the action was all during meticulously documented enforcement against the active commission of felonies and violations of international maritime law. Show any case that resulted in a smuggler getting off for surveillance if you claim expertise. ;]
On the post: The Future The FBI Wants: Secure Phones For Criminals, Broken Encryption For Everyone Else
Ummm, no…
so they twist English into pretzels to call them anything but that. ;]
On the post: Lucha Underground Wrestling Sends Legal Threat To Journalists For Publishing 'Spoilers'
Being majority Catholic countries…
On the post: Lucha Underground Wrestling Sends Legal Threat To Journalists For Publishing 'Spoilers'
Nope.
On the post: Lucha Underground Wrestling Sends Legal Threat To Journalists For Publishing 'Spoilers'
Barbara hasn't been a "señorita" since 1963, Tim,…
:P ;]
On the post: Trump's Lawyers Apparently Unfamiliar With Streisand Effect Or 1st Amendment's Limits On Prior Restraint
"By their fruits ye shall know them"
On the post: More Than Half Of U.S. States Now Pushing Their Own Net Neutrality Rules
In these cases the global nature of the internet is irrelevant…
and provider within that state. It is rarely, if ever, otherwise.
That a customer can then access resources worldwide doesn't
erase the fact that the purchase and sale was between two
entities almost always in the same jurisdiction at that time.
On the post: Wired's Big Cover Story On Facebook Gets Key Legal Point Totally Backwards, Demonstrating Why CDA 230 Is Actually Important
One feature that would really help with the clutter…
if the first post was flagged and then hidden from view.
Without that clutter we'd see more adult conversations.
[ …and fewer of us would waste time arguing with fools. ;]
On the post: My Question To Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein On Encryption Backdoors
The only argument that shuts these guys up is this:
and network-related technology "made in U.S.A."will dry up.
Everybody, Americans included, will shop elsewhere for tech.
That's trillions of dollars in new trade deficits, hundreds
of billions in lost profits to tech industries and tens of
billions in lost taxes every year until a new administration
undoes the damage and stops the bleeding.
Arguing about security and rights of the American people has
no effect on these clowns because they hold the public in
contempt and always will. Show them what effect their dumb-
ass meddling will do to their billionaire friends and corporate
backers and they'll quietly let the issue die off without ever
having to admit why it was a stupid idea to start with.
[Yes, I've said it before; and I'll say it again every time. ;]
On the post: China Is Building The Ultimate Surveillance Tool: A DNA Database Of Every Adult Resident In Troubled Xinjiang Region
Human Rights Watch has forgotten a vital point:
communism arose before this concept could spread into China.
Their laws, policies and social norms simply never had it.
Chinese millennials may know the theory but it's irrelevant
now that Xi Jinping has crowned himself the new Mao-emperor.
On the post: New Documents And Testimony Shows Officers Lied About Their Role In An Arrested Teen's Death
Any competent court could reset the statutory limit…
This is especially true in homicide cases like this one.
On the post: Appeals Court: Forcing A Teen To Masturbate So Cops Can Take Pictures Is A Clear Violation Of Rights
In the case of § 1983…
so the 'judicial officer' can't be sued again for the deed.
____________________________________________________________
§ 1983.
Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance,
regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or
the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be
subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person
within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any
rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured
in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper
proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought
against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in
such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall
not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or
declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of
this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to
the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a
statute of the District of Columbia.
____________________________________________________________
[So, The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals covered his six.]
HOWEVER, he CAN face sanctions by his Law Society for bringing
the Administration of Justice into Severe Disrepute in that state. ;]
On the post: Appeals Court: Forcing A Teen To Masturbate So Cops Can Take Pictures Is A Clear Violation Of Rights
Absolute immunity protects againat that…
On the post: Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Cell Site Location Info Case
Re: Re: resembles no property right that's existed.
;]
On the post: Russian Foreign Ministry Accuses America Of Supporting ISIS With Video Game Footage
I guess that's why they used framegrabs instead of video.
On the post: Russian Foreign Ministry Accuses America Of Supporting ISIS With Video Game Footage
Bullets shine brightly in IR.
Also, they would seem to be traveling slowly when moving
directly away as you move offline, such as when flying.
The game's realism is reasonably good in that respect but
bodies always falling in exactly the same way gives it away. ;]
On the post: Texas National Guard Latest Agency To Be Discovered Operating Flying Cell Tower Spoofers
Correction:
You must overcome THOSE and one of the three THATs to prevail in court,
On the post: Texas National Guard Latest Agency To Be Discovered Operating Flying Cell Tower Spoofers
Don't forget the jurisdictions involved.
unidentified suspects during the commission of a crime,
and using military equipment designed for precisely that
purpose; warrants are irrelevant because they don't exist
under that legal jurisdiction. It's a military search.
Don't forget that the DRT box is designed for this usage and
no court anywhere in the world has ever challenged field use
of field tech by the U.S. military for military operations.
What you, in effect, are saying is that if the U.S. tracked
and then droned a terrorist while he was shooting at troops
or planting bombs, it would become illegal after the fact if
that corpse is later found to be an American terror tourist.
Like I said earlier; show any court case which takes away
a legitimate use of tracking tech by the Coast Guard on patrol.
It hasn't happened never will because THAT use by THOSE
personnel in THAT jurisdiction for THAT purpose is legal.
You must overcome THOSE and all three THATs to prevail in court,
which is the only venue for balancing law under the Constitution.
Constitutional law is a foundation, NOT AN ABSOLUTE RULING.
Reasonable limits apply to all constitutional rights and
all courts are tasked with keeping those limits in order.
The Constitution exists offshore but does not apply to this.
On the post: Texas National Guard Latest Agency To Be Discovered Operating Flying Cell Tower Spoofers
It doesn't matter if they are citizens…
out military missions hundreds of miles away from those borders,
and people they find and pursue are not identified as citizens
of any nation until they are arrested and brought into custody.
And no; no time is wasted on identification during an active
pursuit beyond what is necessary to ensure capture and arrest.
It is not legally required and could incur unnecessary risk.
I am in a good position to know, having worn a uniform myself.
Relative jurisdictions of military and civilian law is central to
Basic and General Military Training in all established and legally
mature military organizations. This is especially true for nations
which tend to lead most international peacekeeping missions.
Constitutional law is a foundation, not an absolute ruling.
Reasonable limits apply to all constitutional rights and
all courts are tasked with keeping those limits in order.
Even if suspects later turn out to be American, tracking and
pursuit in international waters during the act of smuggling
remains legal and unassailable in court; partly because
they are not yet identified and mostly because the action
was all during meticulously documented enforcement against
the active commission of felonies and violations of international
maritime law. Show any case that resulted in a smuggler
getting off for surveillance if you claim expertise. ;]
On the post: Texas National Guard Latest Agency To Be Discovered Operating Flying Cell Tower Spoofers
It's military…
That's beyond domestic jurisdiction both legally and physically.
While they're way out there no warrant is needed and as they
track a plane or boat back into shore it's legally a pursuit.
Once they do their thing and suspects touch shore they can
hold on until DEA or local police take over active pursuit.
They don't want to talk about that because smugglers might
learn to shut cell and sat phones off when they start engines.
On the post: Equustek No-Shows Legal Challenge Of Canadian Court Order Demanding Google Delist Sites Worldwide
Perhaps.
Next >>