Here's an interesting little case.
An employee at a UAW-represented auto manufacturing facility who asserted a religious objection to paying union dues...was required to make a contribution to charity that amounted to more than $100 greater than the amount he would pay [to the union].
$100.00 was not deemed 'significant' by the Court (or by the UAW.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I nominate this as the money quote from the Tribute link:
"Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, Judge Paul Lundsten wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel based in Madison".
The Court is saying that examining a private vehicle for a place to attach a GPS tracking devise is not a violation, because an examination is not a search. In practice, the courts have been watering down 4th amendment rights for years and anything in plain sight forfeits Constitutional protections. What is the big deal if DNR officers leave a big neon glowing GPS tracking unit in the middle of your windshield?
Searching for a place on your car that is not in plain sight is a different matter. I suppose the reasoning will follow the lines that searching is not searching if the intention is not to seize. In our brave new America, words mean only what the Courts want them to mean. Besides, it is a shepherd’s duty to track the flock and the Nanny’s job to keep an eye on those in her care.
Post a Comment