Supreme Court says NOPE to 4th Amendment

[The King]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf

So the USSC has doubled down on a desire to divorce itself from disciplining the enforcement arm of our government.

TLDR - A guy who runs an inn on the border traffics a lot of illegal immigrants...which he reports to CBP. A CBP agent showed up at his place to confront a suspect and proceeded to beat the crap of the informant. The guy complained. Then the CBP agent called the IRS to have them audit the inn owner and...reported his vanity license plate to the state in retaliation.

The USSC's opinion is that they can't intervene because its congresses job to create a system to determine if these agencies have violated a persons constitutional rights...

Lets say that out loud again - a constitutional court (a system for determining if the government has trespassed upon the constitutional rights of a person ) has said that congress will have to create a system to determine if they have trespassed upon the constitutional rights of a person and then enforce action...against themselves. Against the agencies they created.

Dr. What the Fuck?, you are needed in exam room 12.

 

[deersniper]

Sounds like it’s in the citizens hands to redress these grievances.

Y’all blue boys wonder why no likes you and you only have friends that are also cops?

Y’all can dismiss it as your just a cop hater””

Keep digging.

 

[TheHorta]

It’s all a sick joke. The Constitution was on life support 40 years ago. They’re finally getting around to pulling the plug.

Been nice knowing y’all.

 

[rlsmith1]

Can you break it down for a simpleton please? I sense the parties involved don’t align with me politically (they still have rights) and I don’t know who TLDR is.

I do understand that Dr. What the Fuck? is needed desperately everywhere it seems

 

[MtnCreek]

Can you break it down for a simpleton please? I sense the parties involved don’t align with me politically (they still have rights) and I don’t know who TLDR is.

I do understand that Dr. What the Fuck? is needed desperately everywhere it seems

Too Long Didn't Read

Court again rejects extension of Bivens suits against federal officials - SCOTUSblog

Continuing an unbroken decades-long run, the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to extend the right to sue federal officers for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents. In an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court held that a Washington state innkeeper does not have implied causes of

www.scotusblog.com

 

[rlsmith1]

Too Long Didn't Read

Court again rejects extension of Bivens suits against federal officials - SCOTUSblog

Continuing an unbroken decades-long run, the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to extend the right to sue federal officers for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents. In an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court held that a Washington state innkeeper does not have implied causes of

www.scotusblog.com

"...the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to extend the right to sue federal officers for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents."

That's all I needed to know. Oh boy

 

[MtnCreek]

"...the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to extend the right to sue federal officers for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents."

That's all I needed to know. Oh boy

I think you're missing some info.

 

[The King]

Can you break it down for a simpleton please? I sense the parties involved don’t align with me politically (they still have rights) and I don’t know who TLDR is.

I do understand that Dr. What the Fuck? is needed desperately everywhere it seems

My take on it:

Man gets hurt by government in vindictive way that violates his constitutional rights

(The way it should work)
-> goes to court
-> man proves his case
->court says "Never do that again, here is damages for plaintiff"

(The way it works, and affirmed by this case)
-> court says "the people that created this problem wrote a law that says the courts can't cause them harm about this. continue violating constitution, we can't help the plaintiff because the law says we can't and we aren't a legislature, so fuck right off buddy."

Essentially the court said they don't have permission to enforce the Bill of Rights against the Government.

 

[The King]

Can you break it down for a simpleton please? I sense the parties involved don’t align with me politically (they still have rights) and I don’t know who TLDR is.

I do understand that Dr. What the Fuck? is needed desperately everywhere it seems

I'll also add that the plaintiff here seems like a piece of shit. And sheltering a foreign national from inspection by a border patrol agent near a border isn't all that awesome either - there are LOTS of situations where CBP should have used minor amounts of force or even possibly detained the plaintiff.

Its calling the goddamn IRS for an audit and reporting the dudes vanity license plate for revocation as retaliation for opening a complaint that puts me in the red on this one.

 

[rlsmith1]

I'll also add that the plaintiff here seems like a piece of shit. And sheltering a foreign national from inspection by a border patrol agent near a border isn't all that awesome either - there are LOTS of situations where CBP should have used minor amounts of force or even possibly detained the plaintiff.

Its calling the goddamn IRS for an audit and reporting the dudes vanity license plate for revocation as retaliation for opening a complaint that puts me in the red on this one.

That's what makes America great, liberty and justice for all (not just those that agree with me). Add insult to injury the border patrol agent went out and engaged yet another government agency to single out the guy. Punish him for the crimes committed and if during the course of a case it comes up he should be looked at by the IRS then by all means do so. In a way, this report to the IRS is a form of red flag law affirmation too.

Don't get me wrong, sounds like the plaintiff was a criminal but that doesn't mean he can't have due process.

 

[Gommer]

This isn’t news, truly.

They are simply saying they can’t use the constitution as a basis to award damages because there are no damages in the constitution. Congress would need to create law that could then be applied.

It’s not a delegation of judicial authorities, rather points the finger at the branch responsible.

 

[rlsmith1]

I think you're missing some info.

Like what? I think more info would only confirm what I'm thinking. Which is that as a citizen, I am second rate to a federal employee who is "just doing their job"

 

[The King]

This isn’t news, truly.

They are simply saying they can’t use the constitution as a basis to award damages because there are no damages in the constitution. Congress would need to create law that could then be applied.

It’s not a delegation of judicial authorities, rather points the finger at the branch responsible.

Sort of. I understand this viewpoint. The issue is that it breaks the shared responsibility model to remove the ability to award damages even in the absence of a legislative act.

Put another way: Court says "BAD! CONSTITUTION SAY NO!....decide how much to spank yourself if at all..."

Bam - no more court anymore. Just a rubber stamp on the paperwork - it might have black ink or red but who gives a fuck the stamp is there. When you get to decide what the colors mean it's meaningless.

 

[fdkay]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf

So the USSC has doubled down on a desire to divorce itself from disciplining the enforcement arm of our government.

TLDR - A guy who runs an inn on the border traffics a lot of illegal immigrants...which he reports to CBP. A CBP agent showed up at his place to confront a suspect and proceeded to beat the crap of the informant. The guy complained. Then the CBP agent called the IRS to have them audit the inn owner and...reported his vanity license plate to the state in retaliation.

The USSC's opinion is that they can't intervene because its congresses job to create a system to determine if these agencies have violated a persons constitutional rights...

Lets say that out loud again - a constitutional court (a system for determining if the government has trespassed upon the constitutional rights of a person ) has said that congress will have to create a system to determine if they have trespassed upon the constitutional rights of a person and then enforce action...against themselves. Against the agencies they created.

Dr. What the Fuck?, you are needed in exam room 12.

Beat the crap out of him?
Is that what it said? Or did it say "Pushed him to the ground".
There is a big difference there.
Was the officer there to speak with the 'victim"?
Uhhh, no. The officer was there, speaking to someone else (a man of Turkish descent) when your buddy came up and started flapping his gums.

MUCH different than the bullshit you posted. And yes, he was audited. Could have been intentional, or it could have been coincedental, since, you know, he was breaking the law and shit.

Robert Boule is a U.S. citizen who owns and runs the Smuggler’s Inn, a bed-and-breakfast abutting the Canadian border in Blaine, Washington; drives a car with a “SMUGLER” license plate; and worked as a confidential informant for the Customs and Border Patrol. Erik Egbert, a Border Patrol agent, attempted to speak with a guest, newly arrived from Turkey via New York, outside the inn. When Boule asked Egbert to leave his property and attempted to intervene, Egbert shoved him to the ground; when Boule complained to Egbert’s superiors, Egbert allegedly contacted the Internal Revenue Service and state agencies, resulting in a tax audit and investigations of Boule’s activities.

 

[samadisoulcrusher]

The entire political class is your enemy on a daily basis. We are truly 2 America's .
The average citizen is subjected to the political classes whims . We can see everyday politically connected people or those who are .gov
have more rights and are shielded from justice for their crimes .
The same crimes will get, the politically un connected charged and prosecuted . Plus punished with fines and imprisonment.
3 felonies a day was written along time ago. It's probably 6 felonies a day by now and growing.
Every year the political class makes more laws and regulations to box us into smaller and smaller legal boxes.
We are at the point of" show me the man. I will show you the crime."

 

[The King]

Beat the crap out of him?
Is that what it said? Or did it say "Pushed him to the ground".
There is a big difference there.
Was the officer there to speak with the 'victim"?
Uhhh, no. The officer was there, speaking to someone else (a man of Turkish descent) when your buddy came up and started flapping his gums.

MUCH different than the bullshit you posted. And yes, he was audited. Could have been intentional, or it could have been coincedental, since, you know, he was breaking the law and shit.

Robert Boule is a U.S. citizen who owns and runs the Smuggler’s Inn, a bed-and-breakfast abutting the Canadian border in Blaine, Washington; drives a car with a “SMUGLER” license plate; and worked as a confidential informant for the Customs and Border Patrol. Erik Egbert, a Border Patrol agent, attempted to speak with a guest, newly arrived from Turkey via New York, outside the inn. When Boule asked Egbert to leave his property and attempted to intervene, Egbert shoved him to the ground; when Boule complained to Egbert’s superiors, Egbert allegedly contacted the Internal Revenue Service and state agencies, resulting in a tax audit and investigations of Boule’s activities.

Come back when you read 5+ more articles and the USSC opinion. Thanks.

 

[fdkay]

Come back when you read 5+ more articles and the USSC opinion. Thanks.

From the PDF YOU posted:
On Boule’s account, Boule asked Egbert to leave, but Egbert refused, became violent, and threwBoule first against the vehicle and then to the ground. Egbert then checked the immigration paperwork for Boule’s guest and left after finding everything in order. The Turkish guest unlawfully entered Canada later that evening.

Much different than "beat the crap out of him"
The piece of shit was playing both sides.
Illegally smuggling immigrants, then reporting it to CBP.
His mouth wrote a check his ass couldn't cash.

 

[The King]

From the PDF YOU posted:
On Boule’s account, Boule asked Egbert to leave, but Egbert refused, became violent, and threwBoule first against the vehicle and then to the ground. Egbert then checked the immigration paperwork for Boule’s guest and left after finding everything in order. The Turkish guest unlawfully entered Canada later that evening.

Much different than "beat the crap out of him"
The piece of shit was playing both sides.
Illegally smuggling immigrants, then reporting it to CBP.
His mouth wrote a check his ass couldn't cash.

Which is a fair assessment of what happened....until a) a government employee decided to maliciously use another agencies investigative powers in retaliation for a complaint being filed. and b) the USSC said "fuck that noise...if congress didn't want the agencies they created to come to harm for violating someones constitutional rights then our hands are tied."

If Congress is in a position to avoid harm on a Constitutional issue where infringement has occurred...infringement they created...then I only have one question for the the Supreme Court:

 

[fdkay]

Which is a fair assessment of what happened....until a) a government employee decided to maliciously use another agencies investigative powers in retaliation for a complaint being filed. and b) the USSC said "fuck that noise...if congress didn't want the agencies they created to come to harm for violating someones constitutional rights then our hands are tied."

If Congress is in a position to avoid harm on a Constitutional issue where infringement has occurred...infringement they created...then I only have one question for the the Supreme Court:

View attachment 7887600

No argument there

 

[TexPatriot]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf

So the USSC has doubled down on a desire to divorce itself from disciplining the enforcement arm of our government.

TLDR - A guy who runs an inn on the border traffics a lot of illegal immigrants...which he reports to CBP. A CBP agent showed up at his place to confront a suspect and proceeded to beat the crap of the informant. The guy complained. Then the CBP agent called the IRS to have them audit the inn owner and...reported his vanity license plate to the state in retaliation.

The USSC's opinion is that they can't intervene because its congresses job to create a system to determine if these agencies have violated a persons constitutional rights...

Lets say that out loud again - a constitutional court (a system for determining if the government has trespassed upon the constitutional rights of a person ) has said that congress will have to create a system to determine if they have trespassed upon the constitutional rights of a person and then enforce action...against themselves. Against the agencies they created.

Dr. What the Fuck?, you are needed in exam room 12.

I knew a fat fuck loser growing up that became a game warden by snitching off his fellow outlaw poacher friends. I let him stay at my house before he went into the academy and one weekend when I went out of town he skipped out owing me rent and trashed the place.

He knew I was looking for him and I couldn't drive through my little town without getting pulled over for the most minor infraction by his Barney Fife loser cop friends who always made a point to ask if I'd seen him, letting me know he was behind the harassments.

So yeah, I'm disgusted with the chickenshit CBP's actions of turning in the innkeeper to the IRS but not one bit surprised. It's part of their nature.

 

[The King]

I was involved in a police fuckup once where they showed up and beat the fuck out of every person present in a frenzy. When the dust settled they realized they had sorta gone a little nuts and let the mob violence instinct take over. It was so hardcore they had even beat the crap out of a few uniformed officers on scene....I learned how this shit works.

If you are a bad cop, you have the ATF/FBI/DEA on speed dial ready to drop the hammer on anyone that might cause your career harm. And by hammer I mean "cargo container ship load of bullshit lies meant to elicit a violent response from the feds" and more than enough turn into some sort of legal issue so hardcore that nobody is even thinking about what you did anymore.

I hate to say it, but the "anonymous tip hotline" needs to flip over to "show up for biometric capture and a video recorded statement".

 

[Smitty192]

Rule of law is dead. That should not be news to anyone.

They want to selectively choose which laws to enforce? Fuck you...I'll be selective which ones I consider obeying. As for any new laws they intend to pass...well, those will be given the same or less amount of adherence as the others.

Buckle up amigos...BOHICA.

 

[rlsmith1]

Which is a fair assessment of what happened....until a) a government employee decided to maliciously use another agencies investigative powers in retaliation for a complaint being filed. and b) the USSC said "fuck that noise...if congress didn't want the agencies they created to come to harm for violating someones constitutional rights then our hands are tied."

If Congress is in a position to avoid harm on a Constitutional issue where infringement has occurred...infringement they created...then I only have one question for the the Supreme Court:

View attachment 7887600

I was not expecting that pic to find it's way here, thanks for the laugh. After thinking about it that scene is crushingly accurate in this context.

ETA: Peter could be either a .gov employee from a laziness standpoint or the citizen fed up with tyranny

 

[Maser]

I think the no-knock search warrants should have made it clear what the SC thinks about the 4th Amendment.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

“Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away, what you have in this country are privileges... “