Posted on 10/24/2011 3:17:23 PM PDT by Carbonsteel
ORLANDO, Fla. — A federal judge temporarily blocked Florida’s new law that requires welfare applicants to pass a drug test before receiving the benefits on Monday, saying it may violate the Constitution’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Can't let something like being a crack head from getting in the way of getting taxpayer dollars.
he can’t pass a pre-employment drug test. He also would likely qualify as disabled.
Yes people. it’s come to this.
As others have said CW 2 is coming. It’ll be short. We will win.
In locale after locale, common sense laws are being passed and then being overturned or blocked by the effing federal judiciary. Time for the states to tell district court judges to shove it. Past time for congress to start impeachment proceedings against these usurping black robed swine.
We must work to reduce welfare in this country -- not just accept it and try to make the recipients' lives miserable to compensate.
Yeah, well my side thought it’d be short at the last rodeo. Depends on who is on who’s side.
there is no search or siezure...
if you want the money, submit to drug testing
if I have to submit to testing to EARN the money, the least they can do is the same when TAKING the money
there is no search or siezure...
if you want the money, submit to drug testing
if I have to submit to testing to EARN the money, the least they can do is the same when TAKING the money
I disagree. Volunteering to go collect my money means you have to follow my rules. Don’t like it, leave my money on the table and get a job.
Sadly, it seems “activist jurisprudence” would hold that the public has a “duty” to subsidize receipients’ drug habits ! >PS
there is no search or siezure...
if you want the money, submit to drug testing
if I have to submit to testing to EARN the money, the least they can do is the same when TAKING the money
“We must work to reduce welfare in this country — not just accept it and try to make the recipients’ lives miserable to compensate.”
????? Let the worthless slug take all the dope he wants. Just not on MY nickel!!!!
Answer? Stop all welfare payments.
Answer? Stop all welfare payments.
I swear, if I ever get another dog, my dream is to teach him/her to read, then give him/her a list of Federal judges to bite.
Would you consider this similar to DUI checkpoints in being forced to submit to a test where no probable cause exists?
Interesting, so a judge considers drug testing for welfare to be a case of illegal search and seizure.
Would the judge be so kind to rule on the TSA who won’t let people get on a privately owned aircraft with drugs. The TSA assumes I am a criminal, then denies me my 2nd Amendment Rights by violating my 4th and 5th. If I were to fly from Dallas to Houston, TSA would still want to do a search without Probable Cause and without a warrant, a clear violation of the 10th and 14th Amendments.
My Rights to engage in contracts with a private company is routinely violated by the FedGov while there is yet no claim in the Constitution where a drug addict has free access to my wallet.
“A federal judge temporarily blocked Florida’s new law that requires welfare applicants to pass a drug test before receiving the benefits on Monday, saying it may violate the Constitution’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.”
You are getting money from taxpayers for NOTHING, and we cant demand that you be clean before you do?!?!?!
%#%^#&*@ trailer trash judge!
I think the testing was a good idea. I believe that initially, the testing cost ... but the study said that it cost less than the money saved to the recipients. They didn’t have any way to measure how many people just didn’t apply BECAUSE of the testing requirement and there were some that, for some reason, hadn’t been measured.
When a recipient takes the dollars and has a drug habit, it has a ripple effect. They aren’t responsible with the money. Their kids are usually running around being “raised” by the community. If they get foodstamps, they are also selling them for drugs...and hitting up food pantries, emptying THOSE out.
And you are enabling all of that.
Maybe there should be a compassion clause, though, where if someone needs the help and has an addiction...they can claim it and comply with treatment.
“In locale after locale, common sense laws are being passed and then being overturned or blocked by the effing federal judiciary. Time for the states to tell district court judges to shove it. Past time for congress to start impeachment proceedings against these usurping black robed swine.”
It is time for the states to call a Constitutional convention to add amendments limiting the power of the federal judiciary and the federal bureaucracy over the states. In addition there should be no laws passed by Congress requiring states to tax its citizens to support or supplement federal programs.
You would not believe the number of people who sell their food stamps at 50 cents to a dollar to subsidized their alcohol and drug habits. Sell their prescription drugs to purchase stronger drugs. And finally due to recent events, collect welfare while joining the Occupy crowd to get free food and shelter (tents are better than what they had).
Federal judges have also acknowledged the freedom of the IRS to seize property without judicial hearings (i.e. due process). Federal judges also allow the EPA to restrict the use of private property and assess fines on activities involving private use of private property.
I would. I have friends and family who have been on some form of government assistance at various times, so I tell you this first hand. They don't have money to pay their electric bill or truck payment, but they have money for smokes, pot, and tats. But we can't drug test them?
I would. I have friends and family who have been on some form of government assistance at various times, so I tell you this first hand. They don't have money to pay their electric bill or truck payment, but they have money for smokes, pot, and tats. But we can't drug test them?
And meanwhile disabled folks continue to find work and stay OFF welfare.
C’mon you bums. Look me in the eye, and tell me why I’m paying for your benefits.
I am subject to a possible drug test every day I show up to earn those tax dollars confiscated from my paycheck as a nurse. No one is forcing them to accept welfare.
Good. Now start a lawsuit to see the Constitutionally of welfare - cause it is not.
The obamacare mandate is illegal search and seizure.
Don’t violate my 4th Amendment Rights .
I will not provide my health insurance company to the federal govt.
I will not provide my personal ID # to the federal government.
Warning to the feds: I am going to sue on January 1, 2014. On the basis
of 4th Amendment and** 5th Amendment Takings Clause without
due process.
Violate my constitutional rights and you will pay.
Welfare IS NOT a right - either you apply for it, or you don’t ...
If you apply for it - you must pass its requirements for eligibility ...
If drug tests are part of the requirement then - take a cup ...
Mary Stenson Scriven - “Aftican-American” 2008 Bush appointee..
Good example. According to the courts, driving (and flying) are an option and travelers have other choices if they do not want to submit to testing.
Meaning this federal judge is wrong. Welfare is an option and the government may set income level, family size and other requirements in order for citizens to receive it.
I just want to laugh.
Stupid country is stupid, and it proably just ought to be tossed in the ****can already,
The refuse the federal welfare dollars.
So if someone is receiving medical care from the state (Medicare, Medicaid, VA etc.), the government is able to blood test them for say, cholesterol, and require them to change their diet or take certain meds in order to continue to receive care?
Just wondering if there are any limits on what’s reasonable in what they can require you to submit to.
It is pretty crazy when it is ok to drug test employees but it not ok to drug test welfare queens.
Don't worry. That problem will take care of itself real soon...
They're a package deal.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) of 1986 states that medical care cannot be withheld for any reason. Just in case you were "wondering".
The federal government could choose not to reimburse the hospital for treating any patient with high cholesterol, but the hospital would still have to treat them. I'd like to see what happens to the legislator who proposes such a law.
CA Prop 187, while other states stood gawking, until they too have been overrun.
So are there any limits IYHO on what’s reasonable in what the Feds can require you to submit to if you receive a state benefit?
I wish Florida had just said that they will withhold disbursing welfare benefits until the injunction is lifted.
Then give anyone who wants it a bus ticket to Washington D.C.
I once attended a meeting at a drug testing facility who tested for various companies.
I asked the corporate drone who held the meeting and worked for the testing facility if their own employees who conducted the tests, were also randomly drug tested. He stated: "No, our people are not in a position to hurt anyone like a truck driver or machinist". I reminded this guy, his employees had peoples lives, reputations and careers in their hands, and he started doing the big chicken.
The entire meeting melted down after that...
Funny how the lowly Home Depot employee is randomly drug tested, yet cops, judges, congress, teachers, city councils, mayors, and those in federal/government agencies are not randomly tested.
If a Constitutional convention is called then everything, including the 2nd amendment, is on the table for change or elimination. I’d rather a single amendment be added to change the current cluster that the black robed, usurping swine are causing. I could see a bunch of RINOs and dems getting together to eliminate the 2nd amendment in order to “compromise” on some other nonevent.
Yes, and in good “progressive” fashion, it should be thusly parsed:
“unlawful search AND seizure” not “unlawful search AND/OR seizure”. If the unlawful search begets the seizure, it is unconstitutional. If the seizure is not propmpted from an unlawful search, everything is okay-dokey.
It is a difference with scant distinction...
“A federal judge temporarily blocked Florida’s new law...”
The Feds need to keep their worthless noses out of State business.
If the welfare leeches want benefits they need to unzip and grab a cup.
Yes people. it’s come to this.
As others have said CW 2 is coming. It’ll be short. We will win.
***
You’ll win, but China/Russia/NK/Cuba/Arabs/Venezuela can gang up on us, and wipe us out during the time it takes to transition from the Obama/Commie regime to whoever takes up arms.
CW2 is a bad idea.
Sure there are limits. But don't you think drug testing to receive welfare is reasonable?
I mean, the private sector does drug testing all the time. They also do criminal background checks on potential employees. They also track employees on GPS, monitor their telephone and Internet usage, and hold them responsible for behavior off the job.
I think if the government is going to give thousands of dollars to someone, it's not out of line to ask them to pee in a cup to keep the money away from drug users.
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.