alfreda89: (We the People)
alfreda89 ([personal profile] alfreda89) wrote2012-04-03 09:03 am

So, Do We Need a Betting Pool?

SCoTUS, the Supreme Court of the United States, in its attempt to keep us wrapped up in wool and tucked in with our bear, has decided that strip searches are reasonable for traffic tickets, walking a dog off-leash and overly noisy mufflers. This is a HUGE decision, as at least ten states currently forbid by law strip searches for minor violations.

How long do you think this will last, and what high profile person do you think will be grabbed by a cop, mouth off, and end up strip-searched?

[identity profile] morfin.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 02:06 pm (UTC)(link)
I vote:
Alec Baldwin
Mel Gibson
Kardashian/Jersey Shore scum

and of course, Bravo's new series "Bethany Gets Strip Searched!"

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 02:36 pm (UTC)(link)
So we would definitely get entertainment value out of it!
lagilman: coffee or die (Default)

[personal profile] lagilman 2012-04-03 02:07 pm (UTC)(link)
I hereby volunteer George Clooney. He's high profile, willing to speak up, and followed by camera crews pretty much everywhere. And can afford good lawyers.

And if someone has to strip down and be willing to go in front of a court to discuss said fact, why shouldn't it be someone in good shape?

[the only way to approach outrage is with outrage and a sense of humor. otherwise, the outrage eats you.]

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 02:40 pm (UTC)(link)
Definitely on trying to keep our sense of humor here. Clooney would handle it with grace and a lot of expensive lawyers.

I read something recently where a journalist said he didn't think that people were losing faith in the Supreme Court. I've got news for him. I have a long memory -- and what with Bush V. Gore, Corporations are People and now this, I haven't got a lot of respect left for them.

Congress needs to address some of this soon, including a constitutional amendment, if necessary, for that corporation crap.

[identity profile] dancinghorse.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 03:46 pm (UTC)(link)
An impeachment or two might be nice, too. Not that it will ever happen. But Scalia and Thomas both have massive ethics problems--they are ever so lucky that they've managed to exempt themselves from the rules for judges in the lower courts.

The whole system is sick. It needs a massive overhaul. Eventually it will get one--and I hope the bloodshed isn't too extreme.

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 03:55 pm (UTC)(link)
Maybe it's time for an impeachment push. Even if it does come off, it will perhaps be a wake-up call for judges?

I remember tattered Impeach Earl Warren signs in my youth -- my parents had to try and explain them to me.

[identity profile] mouser.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 02:15 pm (UTC)(link)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

We should get some of this - it sounds like it would be really neat!

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2012-04-03 02:42 pm (UTC)(link)
I heard on NPR that one of the lower court judges actually cited this section in ruling for the defendant!

I'm afraid that SCotUS really stepped in this one.