This is Soviet level stuff and the Supreme Court is not our fren.
Great article about a case of the man fighting with his wife. The police convincing him to go into the hospital as a suicide risk and then taking his gun.
But in its first amicus brief before the High Court, the Biden Administration glossed over these concerns and called on the justices to uphold the First Circuit’s ruling. Noting that “the ultimate touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is ‘reasonableness,’” the Justice Department argued that warrants should not be “presumptively required when a government official’s action is objectively grounded in a non-investigatory public interest, such as health or safety.”
and from an opposing amicus
In an amicus brief, the Institute for Justice noted that “to the Founding generation, ‘secure’ did not simply mean the right to be ‘spared’ an unreasonable search or seizure” but also involved “harms attributable to the potential for unreasonable searches and seizures.” Expanding the community caretaking exception to “allow warrantless entries into peoples’ homes on a whim,” argued the IJ brief, “invokes the arbitrary, looming threat of general writs that so incited the Framers” and would undermine “the right of the people to be secure” in their homes.
We haven’t had a 4th amendment in 20 years. They already ruled that the government can monitor/read everything you write and do online, record every text, listen to every voicemail... all on the pretext of stopping terrorism.
Well that was great in 2001 when everyone “knew” who the terrorists were.
Not so great in 2021 when they want to redefine the terrorists to include us.
This is Soviet level stuff and the Supreme Court is not our fren.
Great article about a case of the man fighting with his wife. The police convincing him to go into the hospital as a suicide risk and then taking his gun.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2021/03/23/biden-administration-urges-supreme-court-to-let-cops-enter-homes-and-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?sh=63cfee342829
The Biden Administration Amicus
and from an opposing amicus
Yea, this isn't just about guns. Upholding this would basically do away with the 4th entirely because it turns it into wordplay:
"We had to take his guns because he was posing a public safety risk."
"We had to destroy her garden because she was posing a public safety risk."
"We had to arrest the entire family because they were posing a threat to the public (ie: government) interest."
We haven’t had a 4th amendment in 20 years. They already ruled that the government can monitor/read everything you write and do online, record every text, listen to every voicemail... all on the pretext of stopping terrorism.
Well that was great in 2001 when everyone “knew” who the terrorists were.
Not so great in 2021 when they want to redefine the terrorists to include us.