SCOTUS Repeals Fourth Amendment

And I'm retired. I don't have clients anymore. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Based on what I've seen in this thread that's a good thing.

JAnd I'm retired. I don't have clients anymore. I won more cases than I lost, but it's getting harder. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

First as to the "win/lost" column my experience tells me that lawyers who brag about their "winning" of more cases than they have "lost" fall into two categories: Liars or Extreme Selection of Cases they take. Based upon your "evaluation" of the Thomas opinion and your hysterical headline on this thread it shows a lack of ability to do any "critical thinking" and "careful analysis" to make any "extreme selection of cases." So that leaves me with door "A"!

The "critical thinking" to arrive at door "A" is supported by the second point you attempt to make ....

.....which indicates you are lying about your "win/lost" ratio:

If you are "retired" and don't have "clients anymore," how in the hell do you KNOW it "IS GETTING HARDER" to win cases?

COG you are full of shit.

Please quit making a fool of yourself!

lets be honest about this ruling. . . its only accepted by many on the conservative side because they see it as mostly effecting minorities. But they need to open their eyes, this can happen to any American.

I have no doubt that the founding fathers didn't think it was ok for police to stop and detain citizens until they find something. . police are supposed to have reasonable cause to stop and detain. Any American who isn't appalled by this ruling doesn't understand a huge portion of the reason this country was founded to begin with.

lets be honest about this ruling. . . its only accepted by many on the conservative side because they see it as mostly effecting minorities. But they need to open their eyes, this can happen to any American.

I have no doubt that the founding fathers didn't think it was ok for police to stop and detain citizens until they find something. . police are supposed to have reasonable cause to stop and detain. Any American who isn't appalled by this ruling doesn't understand a huge portion of the reason this country was founded to begin with. Originally Posted by southtown4488

Let's be honest about .... you! You're a dumbshit, who doesn't have clue about the subject matter upon which you post. Not only are you arrogantly stupid enough to "presume" you know what "conservatives" think, you even explore what the "founding fathers" were "thinking"!!!!

You keep showing you intellectual deficiency at every post.

Actually it's gotten to the point of being more a void than a deficiency.

rant rant, no real argument to make. . .so u resort to rants.

Read Sotomayor's dissent. That's where you will find the truth. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Oh, yes... the "wise Latina" is such a brilliant jurist that she made the case all about Ferguson.

"The outlier was Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who went off the deep end with an extended polemic about police misconduct, events in Ferguson, Mo., and race in America. “Although many Americans have been stopped for speeding or jaywalking, few may realize how degrading a stop can be when the officer is looking for more,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. And although Mr. Strieff is white, “it is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny.”

The Justice is getting huzzahs on the left, but her opinion is troubling for her insistence on dragging racial politics into a case that had nothing to do with race. This dissent continues her habit of wandering far from the law or precedent to decide cases based on her personal political and policy views."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/sotomayo...say-1466550429

Oh, yes... the "wise Latina" is such a brilliant jurist that she made the case all about Ferguson.

"The outlier was Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who went off the deep end with an extended polemic about police misconduct, events in Ferguson, Mo., and race in America. “Although many Americans have been stopped for speeding or jaywalking, few may realize how degrading a stop can be when the officer is looking for more,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. And although Mr. Strieff is white, “it is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny.”

The Justice is getting huzzahs on the left, but her opinion is troubling for her insistence on dragging racial politics into a case that had nothing to do with race. This dissent continues her habit of wandering far from the law or precedent to decide cases based on her personal political and policy views."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/sotomayo...say-1466550429 Originally Posted by lustylad

You just brought up Sotomayers race in ur critique of her. .. ur the racist.

You just brought up Sotomayers race.... Originally Posted by southtown4488

Actually, he didn't! But don't let the facts ruin a good tantrum for you!

"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sonia Maria Sotomayor (/ˈsoʊnjə ˈsoʊtəˌmaɪər/, Spanish: [ˈsonja sotomaˈʝor];[5] born June 25, 1954) is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, serving since August 2009. She has the distinction of being its first justice of Hispanic heritage, the first Latina,.....

You are a race-baiting, race-card-tossing POS, who has nothing of substance to offer!

If you say you've read the opinion ...

...... you're also a lying sack full of pieces of shit!

Actually, he didn't! But don't let the facts ruin a good tantrum for you!

"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sonia Maria Sotomayor (/ˈsoʊnjə ˈsoʊtəˌmaɪər/, Spanish: [ˈsonja sotomaˈʝor];[5] born June 25, 1954) is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, serving since August 2009. She has the distinction of being its first justice of Hispanic heritage, the first Latina,.....

You are a race-baiting, race-card-tossing POS, who has nothing of substance to offer!

If you say you've read the opinion ...

...... you're also a lying sack full of pieces of shit! Originally Posted by LexusLover

I know your kind. . .the racist kind. You support racist politicians and racist policies, then you accuse minorities of being racist. I wont ever fall for such a weak attempt at a sleight of hand.

First "Hispanic" because people of Portuguese descent are commonly excluded from being defined as "Hispanic"; thus, excluding Justice Benjamin Cardozo whose ancestors were purportedly of Portuguese and not Spanish descent.

You just brought up Sotomayers race in ur critique of her.... ur the racist. Originally Posted by southtown4488

"Wise Latina" is her own self-description from a 2001 UC-Berkeley commencement speech, you ignorant dipshit. Sotomayor is an open advocate of allowing "identity politics" to taint judicial opinion-making and override legal precedent and/or the plain language of the Constitution.

You know, sort of like what Trump accused Judge Curiel of doing:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-th...nas-1465751689

Btw suckclown, it's obvious to everyone that you can't debate your way out of a paper bag, so you simply call everyone you disagree with a racist. You play that card so often you wouldn't know what real racism is if it smacked you in the face.

You know, sort of like what Trump accused Judge Curiel of doing: Originally Posted by lustylad

Is that the Federal Judge who used his "Hispanic" heritage to get funding for school, not to mention an appointment to a bench in Southern California?

I thought so! Then whines because someone called him "Hispanic" ...

.. or was it of "Mexican heritage"?..... and that "news snip" is GONE!

But look at the "bright side" .... that was all SouthMouth could whine about!

A Black Judge writes an opinion approving of the use of evidence legally obtained, and all numbnutz has to whine about is someone mentioning that a dissenting Judge is "Hispanic"!

What a whining little pussy-whipped loud mouth .... Southmouth is!

"Wise Latina" is her own self-description from a 2001 UC-Berkeley commencement speech, you ignorant dipshit. Sotomayor is an open advocate of allowing "identity politics" to taint judicial opinion-making and override legal precedent and/or the plain language of the Constitution.

You know, sort of like what Trump accused Judge Curiel of doing:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-th...nas-1465751689

Btw suckclown, it's obvious to everyone that you can't debate your way out of a paper bag, so you simply call everyone you disagree with a racist. You play that card so often you wouldn't know what real racism is if it smacked you in the face. Originally Posted by lustylad

I know a racist when I see/hear one. . . that includes you. That included Trump. . . were gonna see what the American people think this November.

You will still have the KKK to support.

Sounds like the Texas law infringes upon the rights guaranteed by the fourth amendment.

As I stated, it was not the intention of the founders to have the people controlled by government but to have the government controlled by the people.

The fact, and it is fact, that the government constantly lies, deceives, and obfuscates in order to bend the citizens to the will of a few is chronicled on a daily basis. It is, however , unfortunate that so many of our citizens are easily duped. It still does not make it right.

I know, if you do not like the law then change it. The biggest mistake the founders made was to not have sunset provisions on all laws save for the Constitution which they did make means for change.

Our nation wastes not only treasury, but lives in a war that cannot be won and has no success and only casualties. It has created more useless government that further infringes upon our liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I know a racist when I see/hear one... that includes you. Originally Posted by southtown4488

There you go again, you lib-retarded troll! You just made my point!

Suckclown brings nothing but knee-jerk name-calling to this forum! Facts and reasoning are his nemesis!