Supreme Court Refuses to Take on NSA Metadata Case

Softpedia ^ | 7 Apr 14 | Gabriela Vatu

[AllAmericanGirl44]

bkmk

[zeugma]

What reason need s to happen is for the phrase “reasonable expectation of privacy” needs to be elliminated from our legal lexicon. This is the worst sort of orwellian phrase that has been used over and over again to increase the power of the state to do whatever the hell it wants to do to us.

[VerySadAmerican]

Yes, they all have something to hide. And the presidents that appointed them all knew the dirt. Yet they appointed them anyway. Probably because they thought they could control them. Then when they left the white house the next president had even more dirt.

[Yaelle]

Yes but even worse is making Roberts chief justice. Bush should have made Clarence Thomas chief justice.
—

Yeah, I never got that. Didn’t bush even look into how this guy got two blonde kids from Central America?? No red flag there?? Then again, bush floated that dreadful woman as a SC nominee. Sheesh.

[magna carta]

OK Thanks.

[Colorado Doug]

The Supreme Court is like a referee on a football field. The Congress, the President, the state police, and other government officials are the players. Some can pass laws, and others can enforce laws. But all exercise power within certain boundaries. These boundaries are set by the Constitution. As the “referee” in the U.S. system of government, it is the Supreme Court’s job to say when government officials step out-of-bounds.

Problem is, with this SCOTUS, a federal player can catch the ball in the parking lot and it's still ruled in-bounds.

[ourworldawry]

““You take this case and we will spill the beans about X, Y, and Z....”

The Supreme Court is OWNED!!! Obamacare taught us this valuable lesson...”

---

I say..START SPILLIN, because surely it will be an equal effort. And then, THAT case would be the very next one on MY docket.