Skip to comments.Hoosier Hospitality or Fourth Amendment Violation?
Posted on 05/16/2011 5:33:27 PM PDT by TheConservativeCitizen
COURT IGNORES U.S. CONSTITUTION AND 800 YEARS OF COMMON LAW
The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that Hoosiers do not have the right to resist unlawful entry of their homes by police.
Think about it for a moment; the court overruled nearly 800 years of common law, dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215 and the U.S. Constitution as well.
Justice Steven David, writing for the court: If a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner has no right to stop the officers 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.
The right to resist unlawful police entry is against public policy? Does anyone else find it laughable that this dopey judge actually uses the term UNLAWFUL police entry in this ridiculous ruling? And public policy? What public policy nullifies the U.S. Constitution?
Incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence? What exactly is modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence? No Fourth Amendment rights at all, I guess.
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.
Resisting unlawful activity is a no-no because it escalates the level of violence? Lets extrapolate that logic: A man about to be murdered or a woman about to be raped shouldnt resist because it will escalate the level of violence? What planet are we on?
Maybe its just me; the whole thing reads more like a page out of a police-state manual than a ruling by a justice of an American court, let alone the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution:
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.
Im no constitutional attorney, but the Fourth Amendment reads pretty clearly to me; especially the part about oath or affirmation describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
As a Hoosier, the idea that Hoosier Hospitality now means that we must allow the police into our homes whenever they choose to stop by sickens me. Mussolini would be proud.
Obviously, the police should begin by invading Justice David’s home first, because he must be on meth to come up with this totally bizarre ruling. Don’t people in Indiana vote for judges? He needs to be fired.
When does the Tree of Liberty need to be fertilized?
I don't think so.
I hope all the cops in Indiana have real impeccable morals. Otherwise this policy is a prescription for disaster.
Just arrange for a flash mob of police to show up and bust down this judige’s door for no apparent reason.
When he demands they leave have the cops retort right back that some judge recently ruled that the cops can bust into anyone’s home for any reason without any reason and its unlawful for the occupants of the residence to resist.
When the judge said he made that ruling then one cop should go up to him and say,
“Sir, we’re the cops and we can do anything we want according to you and now we are doing it. And remember that if you resist then it is considered unlawful for you to do so. As a result, we can shoot you, shoot your dog, eat your food, burn down your house, rape your wife, kill your children, and whatever else you can think of, and get away with it because we’re the cops and we’re unionized! Remember that, Bucko.”
Then he kicks the judge in the head and they all leave.
Now how long do you think his ruling would stand before he decided to change his mind?
Justice Steven David, writing for the court:
Steven David? There is something seriously wrong here. How many justices compose the Indiana Supreme Court, and a majority decided in favor?
Like an FR comment the other day, to the LEFT their viewpoint is entirely self-consistent internally. They see only one way, the exercise of power over others.
It really is a psychological malady. Common among lawyers and judges (who are lawyers) given they are trained to commit to only one possibility.
Every state should pass a “Judge’s First” law.
If they ever let sex predators go because their ‘time is up’, they must be placed in a house next to the judge’s house, with a clear view of the judge’s yard and main windows.
Same with violenbt criminals. All violent criminals lib judges release are released into THEIR custody, and will be housed either IN the judge’s house or in a property adjacent to the judge.
Eminent Domain cases - Judges shall first have all of their own properties looked at and reviewed and considered for taking away via eminent domain laws they say are legal.
Basically any rights a judge takes away or invents out of thin air, will automatically be applied to the judges, first.
Who put this moron Supreme Court Justice on the Court? I assume it had to be a hard core leftist Democrat. But please confirm - who appointed this jackwagon to the Supreme Court. That person needs to be politically castrated so they can’t do any more damage.
I want to hear about the gov’s response to this.
“I want to hear about the govs response to this.”
“I want to hear about the govs response to this.”
Governor Mitch Daniels appointed this sh*%t for brains judge less than 6 months ago.
Thanks for confirming for me what I had heard: that this POS was indeed appointed by Mitch Daniels.
That’s probably the most common sense idea I’ve heard in a long time!
Judges today are out of control and have no respect for the law let alone reverence for justice.
A Florida judge had a dead beat dad in his court and simply waived his arrearages to allow the dead beat dad to claim child exemptions for tax returns.
Santa Rosa County court, Judge Miller.
Ah, the pygmyrino.
Clearly a violation of the fourth amendment.
As such, it’ll be overturned eventually - alas, too late for the poor Marine and his family who got caught in the middle of the police incompetence/stupidity/brutality that sparked it all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.