Skip to comments.Craig entitled to his privacy, ACLU argues
Posted on 01/15/2008 6:39:00 PM PST by phatus maximus
In an effort to help Idaho Sen. Larry Craig, the American Civil Liberties Union is arguing that people who have sex in public bathrooms have an expectation of privacy.
Craig is asking the Minnesota Court of Appeals to let him withdraw his guilty plea from a bathroom sex sting at the Minneapolis airport. The ACLU on Tuesday filed a brief supporting the Idaho Republican.
The ACLU wrote that a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago found that people who have sex in closed stalls in public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy."
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
The pantyman Craig has spoken./Just Asking - seoul62......
public = private?
How could the ACLU pass up an opportunity to embarass the GOP?
public = private?
According to the ACLU, yes.
IF SO, then the mile high club should be legal, no?
I expect Mr. Craig’s petition would have a significantly greater chance of success WITHOUT this idiotic amicus brief.
yeah right - privacy - in a place where there are grunts interrupted by loud wet explosive bursts of smelly gas
woohoo let’s go! (mighty cramped in that bathroom, tho)
Reasonable expectation of privacy in a public bathroom? Only to a very limited extent; that is that you can expect no more than not having someone watch what you’re doing, maybe.
There’s clearly something about *public* bathroom that these lawyer types don’t get.
They have no clue what idiots they are making of themselves in the eyes of the public.
Sex is more important than the GOP as so many of the people it watches out for participate in such ludeness...
Yeah...privacy to go pee for a few minutes, not to have sex for 20! I can't believe the ACLU doesn't have better things to do.
Nothing says love like the sweet sweet smell of last nights double bean burrito...
Hmmm, well I guess that’s one stance on the subject...
yeah does wonders for the libido
Only because there is a door on the public stall, that gives some credence to the expectation of privacy. Not defending this idiot in anyway, but that is their argument.
How incredibly embarrassing to have someone with an “R” next to his name, being aligned with the ACLU!!!!
Amicus brief is the life blood of the ACLU. In their case, amicus brief is the first stage in their intimidation practices (usually enough).
Aside from the fact that it is called a public restroom and that the purpose of providing the room is not public sex (then it would be called a public sex room). Perhaps the ACLU who, I believe, has joined the Muslim groups in demanding foot washing facilities and prayer rooms, will sue the various airports, train stations, hotels, malls, for public buggering rooms.
Wonder what would happen if one of the witnesses took the stand, then crouched down behind it and proceeded to either play with himself or take a dump, while yelling “Can’t a guy get any PRIVACY here?!”
OK, granted that would be pretty sick and I know what would happen, but it would strongly and quite graphically make a point.
They don’t oppose the GOP. They support perversion, where ever it appears.
I predict that Larry Craig WILL try to run again for his Senate stall, I mean seat, because he is truly one of the stupidest human beings ever to be elected from the great state of Idaho.
Oops! I forgot about Frank Church but he was more evilly anti-American than just plain stupid.
California state parks have removed all the doors from the crapper stalls because of this problem and you have to do your business facing the public.
I suppose the ACLU will sue the state to force them to put the doors back on to restore privacy for sex, not crapping. Sigh.
HE WASN’T HAVING SEX. He was possibly cruising for someone of the same sex but there was no overt sex act attempted.
They could’ve gone anywhere “for the act”.
Then again the Left and MSM knew that Mark Foley hadn’t had sex with minors when they ran with that as the angle on the other story.
The Gay-Lesbian-Bi-Tranny task force has been pushing for decriminalizing same sex bathroom encounters for some time.
They feel that “their community” is unfairly targeted.
Since it is criminal for a man to go lurking in a woman’s restroom to begin with, that probably accounts for why they have less success cruising women. And of course women probably feel a huge “ICK” factor over some strange guy asking to follow them in the bathroom so they can have sex.
Yes, but usually they are attempting to actually HELP the person on whose behalf they claim to be filing, to win the case at hand. In this case, the brief — which was probably not endorsed by Craig or his attorneys — is clearly going to have the opposite effect, if any. If Craig knows what’s good for him, he’ll vociferously repudiate it. Aside from being idiotic on its face, it also essentially contradicts his official claim that he wasn’t attempting to solicit sex in the restroom, and that his “wide stance” was misinterpreted. Equally idiotic, but in direct conflict with the ACLU brief.
It makes no sense at all.
can’t he just wear womens clothing and be quite about it like the other queers?
They have received hours and hours of positive praise and coverups from the liberal news media for decades.
Their politics match that of the far left communists who opposed America in the thirties, forties and fifties until the liberal courts and the destruction of Mccarthy gave them new bravery for their perverted ideas in the nineteen sixites.
Today the Free Republic social liberals who are always quoting the rulings of liberal judges follow in their perverted footsteps.
The ACLU promotes filth and perversion because so many of them live their lives apart from common decency and morality.
They strive, lie and labor to destroy the Judeo-Christian morality our parents nurtured and passed onto us for almost four hundred years.
They hate America, they love dishonesty and depravity.
By design and intention. . .and for necessity; so why is their a reasonable expectation of privacy for having sex in a public toilet?
This is beyond stupid. . .and yes; 'Agenda' inspired conclusions here.
. . .what is it about 'boundaries' that Libs cannot grasp?
The public has right to not expect - or be exposed to perversions of the 'third' kind in a bathroom.
Not by sight or sound.. .or inference. Not by commission.
But not his Senate seat. See ya, Widestance.
“WE SUPPORT YOUR RIGHT TO GAY SEX IN A PUBLIC BATHROOM!
Just trying to help, Mr. Craig.” — ACLU
Besides tapping his foot (a subjective call at best) what did he do wrong? Everything he did was within the parameters of legality so say the ACLU. What was he arrested for? (not on his side pervert to the max, just questioning as a legal question?
Depends on the meaning of 'is' . . .was. . .or 'whatever'. Depends on 'one foot tapping'. . .
Libs are destroying the value of the law; by degrading the 'spirit of the Law'.
So...ok... we do not know the 'mind' here. Interesting; where does ACLU stand on 'hate crimes'?
Given the latest announcement - 'public health' really - that Gay men are 'hosting' the flesh-eating bacteria/staph MURSA; guess they might feel even moreso.
At the same time; given the health risks; this should not be shared in ANY public facility; much less a bathroom as used by the 'well-intenioned'.
Larry Craig should have had better things to do.
Didn’t the congress critter plead guilty to a crime?
If so then that crime becomes public record.
Then it is up to individuals whether or not they care to ridicule the pervert.
...Mmno. Thanks for playing, ACLU.
To be added to this ping list just make some stupid bathroom humor innuendo that has nothing to do with Larry Craig.
Craig really blew it. He threw his life down the toilet. The only way he can resurrect his career is to suck it up, swallow his pride, get on his knees and ask for forgiveness.
Good question. I asked a buddy of mine Dick Weiner over at the law firm of Weiner, Johnson and Wang and he said that the prosecutions case is hard to win. It would probably end in a hung jury and Craig would not receive a stiff sentence.
Um...They’re called PUBLIC bathrooms for a reason.
He needs to stop tap dancing around the guilt, take a hands on approach and pull at the root of the problem.
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.