Free Talk Live

FBI Special Agent Joseph Schadler said, “court decisions have consistently upheld that there is no warrant necessary for GPS tracking of a vehicle.” but that’s not entirely true. This issue in full of legal vagaries with contradictory rulings from the Ninth Circuit Court and the DC Court of Appeals.

The Supreme Court’s decision lets stand a January ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which held that the cross display violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As the Ninth Circuit explained, “The use of such a distinctively Christian symbol to honor all veterans sends a strong message of endorsement and exclusion. It suggests that the government is so connected to a particular religion that it treats that religion’s symbolism as its own, as universal.

The Indiana State Supreme Court has just nullified the Fourth Amendment and the equivalent provision of that state’s constitution, in addition to “a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215,” notes a wire service report. In a 3–2 decision, the court has ruled that Indiana residents have no right to obstruct unlawful police incursions into their homes.

This fall a Supreme Court decision could force the police in Florida to require warrants before secretly installing GPS trackers. As of now, they do need a warrant saying it does not violate the Fourth Amendment.

"The police can't be trusted to police themselves," public Defender Howard Finklestein said. "There must be a check on police behavior or it will become an abuse of power. And the check has always been the Fourth Amendment."

BOSTON (AP) — The odor of burnt marijuana alone is not enough for police to suspect criminal activity and order a person to get out of a car, the state’s highest court ruled Tuesday, citing a state law that decriminalizes possession of small amounts of the narcotic.

he Las Vegas police officer who shot and killed an unarmed Trevon Cole during a June drug raid over small-time marijuana sales was "justified," a coroner's inquest found Saturday night, despite contradictory findings from the medical examiner.

Although all nine Supreme Court Justices agreed to overturn the charges in this case, they disagreed five to four as to why. What this means is that the Court completely failed to settle the conflicting decisions from lower-courts, which was of course the whole point.

The constitutional chamber of Honduras' Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that privately run cities in the Central American country would be unconstitutional, threatening a project to build "model cities" with their own police, laws, government and tax systems. The five-judge panel voted 4-to-1 in a ruling that goes against the Honduran government and the country's elite. Because the decision was not unanimous, the case now goes to the full 15-member Supreme Court, which is expected to take it up within 10 days.

Supreme Court rules that man who was almost executed after 14 years on death row has no recourse despite prosecutorial abuse.