Indiana Supreme Court: citizens have no right to resist unlawful police entry

Examiner ^ | May 16th | Howard Portnoy

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

In a move that flies not only in the face of the U.S. Constitution but defies common law dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that residents of the Hoosier state have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David, writing for the majority, expressed the view that

a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Do not resist, or we will bury you.

The insanity continues.

[Psalm 144]

The bedrock of a totalitarian state. Might makes right.

[Mr. K]

WHAT THE F-ING F?????????????????????

People should start rioting over this one

[antonico]

The Court’s Majority Opinion was written by Judge David. A Mitch Daniel’s appointee. In case we needed any more proof Daniels isn’t fit for the Presidency.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Indiana Supreme Court: citizens have no right to resist unlawful police entry

	05/16/2011 9:22:18 AM PDT · by Halfmanhalfamazing · 3 replies Examiner ^ | May 16th | Howard Portnoy In a move that flies not only in the face of the U.S. Constitution but defies common law dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that residents of the Hoosier state have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David, writing for the majority, expressed the view that a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and...
Indiana Supreme Court rules Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful entry of homes by police
	05/16/2011 8:46:27 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 32 replies Hotair ^ | 05/16/2011 | Bruce McQuain No, you read it right. ThatÂ’s what the Indiana Supreme Court decided in what would be a laughable finding if it wasnÂ’t so serious: Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if...
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home‏
	05/16/2011 6:25:46 AM PDT · by Cheeks · 42 replies nwitimes.com ^ | 5/13 | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry. "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David...
No Right to Resist Unlawful Police Entry: Indiana Supremes
	05/15/2011 8:17:50 AM PDT · by KeyLargo · 64 replies Outside the Beltway ^ | May 14, 2011 | James Joyner Outside the Beltway No Right to Resist Unlawful Police Entry: Indiana Supremes James Joyner May 14, 2011 For as long as the notion of individual rights has existed, one of them has been the notion that one’s home is sacrosanct. As of Thursday, that’s no longer true in Indiana. AP (“Court: No right to resist unlawful police entry“): People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law. The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers...
(Indiana) Court: No right to resist unlawful police entry
	05/14/2011 3:32:09 AM PDT · by markomalley · 138 replies AP/Chicago Tribune ^ | 5/13/11 People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law. The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers who enter their homes without any right would increase the risk of violent confrontation. If police enter a home illegally, the courts are the proper place to protest it, Justice Steven David said. "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment...
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
	05/13/2011 6:33:44 PM PDT · by WildSnail · 81 replies NWI Times ^ | Friday, May 13, 2011 3:56 pm | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
	05/13/2011 6:33:44 PM PDT · by WildSnail · 81 replies NWI Times ^ | Friday, May 13, 2011 3:56 pm | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home[Indiana]
	05/13/2011 6:35:22 AM PDT · by jaydubya2 · 194 replies nwitimes ^ | Thursday, May 12, 2011 | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry. "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David...

[Brownie63]

Unbelieveable. Velkome to Amerika.

[Forgotten Amendments]

And what will our “conservatives?” say about this? Nothing! The airwaves will be full of more important things. Like, what rapper gets invited to the White House, what mean thing George Soros said, and calling Ron Paul crazy.

[B.O. Plenty]

The "judge" is a fool is all that can be said.

He obviously has not considered the consequences, intended or unintended.

[muawiyah]

You have a whole lot of threads on this topic already prepared. Just do a search for INDIANA.

Nope, there was no illegal entry. Guy didn't live there. Woman who did called in the cops. End of story. This was a case of a new Chief Justice who'd been a colonel most of his life taking a chance to pontificate and beat people over the head.

He should be removed for that.

[cpdiii]

There is this little problem for that piece of sh-- law in Indiana. It is called the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[peridot]

Rush started his show saying this is the most important thing that isn’t being reported. He’s on a tangent.

[muawiyah]

Thanks for the list.

[muawiyah]

Rush’s fact checkers were probably resting up from the weekend. Gad.

[Springfield Reformer]

Oh, I don’t know. We have time for all that and the Constitution too.

[muawiyah]

It’s not a Fourth Amendment case. Read it.

[Forgotten Amendments]

Good for him! I’m shocked.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Sorry. I searched, but clearly I didn’t do a good job.

[jmaroneps37]

These people are friggin’ insane!

[Jack Hammer]

Clearly a violation of the Fourth Amendment; this will be overturned by a higher court very soon.

The judges voting for this were/are ignorant fools, unsuitable for the positions they hold.

[InvisibleChurch]

many threads, one