Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
You'll have to forgive me, but I'm probably going to fall on dksuddeth's side on this one. The 4th Amendment is not actually that complex. The search is only admissible if the arrest is legal. This, of course, is to prevent the police from searching when and where they want by using BS arrests that would never hold up. It's a very simple concept.
I was watching Boston Legal (or Drugs for Liberals) last night and the main character, Alan Shore, appeared before the supreme court in order to defend a mentally disabled man from being executed. During the course of his opening arguments, he got off topic and began to read the supreme court justices the riot act over becoming partisan. I was almost in tears, and I find it to be quite relevant. I hope you'll watch (starts at 3:29):
I advise you to watch this quickly, as it will be removed soon.
|
I don't have much comment on this without further review, but how does a unanimous decision relate to partisanship of the supreme court?
Normally I'd be very much against this sort of thing but the UNpartisan nature of this decision makes me want to look into the details more.