|
This is a purely educational website. Nothing here is legal advice or creates or implies an attorney-client relationship. If you have a specific legal issue, PLEASE talk to a lawyer who practices where you live—laws vary from place to place, and how they're applied varies from courthouse to courthouse. Your local county bar association can probably refer someone who handles matters like yours.
By using this site, you agree that you are awesome. Use of this site also constitutes acceptance of its Terms of Service and Privacy Policies, which are known to medical science as a cure for insomnia.
It's best to keep all discussions in the comments. But if you really need to reach Nathan privately, go ahead and email him at n.e.burney@gmail.com. He won't mind.
THE ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO LAW and the PEEKING JUSTICE logo are pretty damn cool trademarks and should probably be registered one of these days.
© Nathaniel Burney. All rights reserved, though they really open up once you get to know them.
|
|
Love the comic, and thank you for following through on Oddstar’s suggestion for the “beginning of chapter” button it was my one issue with the strip.
Was curious if you had read this
https://www.frtv.org/2010/06/16/constitution-free-zone-border-patrol-security-search-and-seizure-laws/
I just saw it recently (and don’t even know if it is true)
That falls under the heading of “border searches,” which we’ll discuss later in the chapter. Hang on, we’ll get there.
It’s a misnomer to call it a “constitution-free zone,” though. These searches are within the bounds of what the Supreme Court has had to say on the matter. That phrase is the kind of hysterical overkill that makes it hard to take calls for reform seriously. (I think the ACLU is the one that started doing this.)
And the page you linked to is so full of errors, it’s hard to even know where to start. There may well be an issue with using (constitutionally permitted) administrative searches for the purpose of catching criminals, but misinformation and hysteria aren’t the way to deal with it.
This is a joke, right? When is the last time a judge actually rejected evidence due to 4th Amendment? The constitution has been dead for decades. The cop will just lie that he had some probable cause. Every time.
Suppression of evidence happens all the time. Whenever you hear of a “technicality,” it’s usually about someone’s 4th amendment rights being trampled, which the media conveniently omits.
Please read what Nathan said above about “hysterical overkill”.