No if they’d only rule against the Patriot Act and other invasions of privacy and police state activities.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that police must obtain a search warrant before using a GPS device to track criminal suspects. But the justices left for another day larger questions about how technology has altered a person’s expectation of privacy.
[...]
“We hold that the government’s installation of a GPS device on a target’s vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements, constitutes a ‘search’ ” under the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, Scalia wrote.
[...]
It was that question — society’s expectation of privacy in a modern world — that had animated the court’s consideration of the case. In an intense hour-long oral argument last November, the Big Brother of George Orwell’s novel “1984” was referenced six times. The justices pondered a world in which satellites can zero in on an individual’s house, cameras can record the faces at a crowded intersection and individuals can instantly announce their every movement to the world on Facebook. They wondered about the government placing tracking devices in overcoats or on license plates.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said the decision also should have settled some of those questions instead of deciding a case about a “21st-century surveillance technique” by using “18th-century tort law.”

Congress may take books, musical compositions and other works out of the public domain, where they can be freely used and adapted, and grant them copyright status again, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

In a 6-2 ruling, the court said that, just because material enters the public domain, it is not “territory that works may never exit.” (.pdf)
[...]
Writing for the majority, Justice Ruth Ginsburg said “some restriction on expression is the inherent and intended effect of every grant of copyright.” But the top court, with Justice Elena Kagan recused, said Congress’ move to re-copyright the works to comport with an international treaty was more important.
[...]
In dissent, Justices Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito said the legislation goes against the theory of copyright and “does not encourage anyone to produce a single new work.” Copyright, they noted, was part of the Constitution to promote the arts and sciences.

A Saudi Arabian man is attempting to sell his own son on Facebook. His asking price is 73 million UAE Dirhams, or around $20 million.

The man in question, Saud bin Nasser Al Shahry, saw his illegal debt-collection business shut down by a local court. He told a Quatari news outlet Al Sharq that the human trafficking was his only option to avoid “living in poverty” along with his wife and daughter.

Al Shahry stated that he would go to the courts if necessary to complete the sale and that, in addition to the $20 million, all he wanted to know about the buyer of his child is the city in which the buyer is located.

A man whose bid to become a police officer was rejected after he scored too high on an intelligence test has lost an appeal in his federal lawsuit against the city. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a lower court’s decision that the city did not discriminate against Robert Jordan because the same standards were applied to everyone who took the test.

“This kind of puts an official face on discrimination in America against people of a certain class,” Jordan said today from his Waterford home. “I maintain you have no more control over your basic intelligence than your eye color or your gender or anything else.”

This story goes well with this.

UPDATE: Going in the opposite direction, Dallas won’t send cops for under $50 shoplifting complaints.

A U.S. appeals panel on Thursday upheld the constitutionality of a federal law that grants immunity to telecommunications companies that assist the U.S. government in conducting surveillance of American citizens. However, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also revived a separate lawsuit against the government over its surveillance activities.

Several lawsuits filed in the wake of revelations about warrantless wiretapping alleged that telecom companies provided authorities with direct access to nearly all communications passing through their domestic facilities. Besides the government itself, defendants included AT&T, Sprint Nextel and Verizon.

In 2008, Congress granted telecoms immunity for cooperating with the government’s intelligence-gathering activities. A district judge in San Francisco upheld the law as constitutional, and dismissed the claims against the companies.

In a ruling on Thursday, a unanimous three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit agreed…

Cindy Cohn, legal director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a leading plaintiff in both cases, said they had not yet decided whether to appeal the telecom ruling…

Cohn said it has been nearly six years since warrantless wiretapping was revealed. “I think the American people deserve a little faster justice than that,” she said.

Keep on rocking in the Free World.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the tale of Steven Howards, a Lane client who says his freedom of speech was chilled by the Secret Service at a Colorado appearance by then-Vice President Dick Cheney. What’s the crux of the case?

According to Lane, “The issue is, does probable cause for an arrest eliminate your right to have a trial on your First Amendment rights?”

The controversy dates back to a 2006 Cheney appearance in Beaver Creek.
[...]
“Hypothetically, a guy could make an anti-police speech to a crowd and then throw down a cigarette butt, and they could arrest him for littering when everyone knows the real reason he was being arrested was because they didn’t like his speech. And various circuit courts have held that you don’t get to go to court on a First Amendment claim if they had probable cause to arrest you for something else — and they can always come up with something to arrest you for, completely ignoring the fact that the subjective intent of the police officer was to punish you for free speech.

He was on the TV show, “Celebrity Apprentice” I’m a Celebrity … Get Me Out of Here! Well, he’s outta here now!

Rod Blagojevich, the ousted Illinois governor whose three-year battle against criminal charges became a national spectacle, was sentenced to 14 years in prison Wednesday, one of the stiffest penalties imposed for corruption in a state with a history of crooked politics.

Blagojevich’s 18 convictions included allegations of trying to leverage his power to appoint someone to President Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat to raise campaign cash or land a high-paying job.

The twice-elected Democrat is now the second former Illinois governor in a row to be sentenced to prison, and the fourth Illinois governor in the last four decades. His Republican predecessor, George Ryan, currently is serving a sentence of 6 1/2 years, also for corruption.

What other politicians do you think should be tried and sent to prison?

So I guess this means all out war by the government, for corporations, against citizens.

On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder urged Americans to fink on their neighbors and report intellectual-property offenses like popping or hawking unapproved pharmaceuticals and downloading music and movies illegally.

The announcement at the White House came as the Justice Department kicked off a public campaign against intellectual-property theft, which like all successful wars against societal scourges, will have public-service announcements on MTV.

“Fortunately, we can all be part of the solution. Anyone who suspects an IP crime can visit cybercrime.gov, fbi.gov, or iprcenter.gov to report suspected offenses,” Holder said. “The public’s proactive attention to these issues can help us to disrupt the sale of illegal goods; to prosecute the individuals, gangs, and international criminal organizations that profit from these activities; and to stop those who would exploit the ingenuity of others for monetary gain.”

So far there’s no word on what kind of reward you’ll get for reporting your teen sister for using an app to turn a Miley Cyrus YouTube video into an MP3, but surely you’ll get at least a Scouting badge for your loyalty to Big Content and the American Way.

Altogether now, “If you see something, say something!”

Julian P. Heicklen, a 79-year-old retired chemistry professor, has often stood on a plaza outside the United States Courthouse in Manhattan, holding a “Jury Info” sign and handing out brochures that advocate jury nullification, the controversial view that if jurors disagree with a law, they may ignore their oaths to follow it and may acquit a defendant who violated it.

Then, last year, federal prosecutors had Mr. Heicklen indicted, charging that his activity violated the law against jury tampering. Lawyers assisting him have sought dismissal of the case on First Amendment grounds.
[...]
“No legal system could long survive,” they added, “if it gave every individual the option of disregarding with impunity any law which by his personal standard was judged morally untenable.”

Umm… Like they are trying to do with this guy by disregarding his 1st Amendment rights?

I wonder when this will spread to real police forces as we gear up for the increased police state the US is becoming. $20 for a jay walker, $10,000 for a murderer. Wonder how much for a website with a copyrighted video? On the one hand, you might have more real criminals caught while reducing arrests for trivial things (with trivial payouts) like pot smoking. On the other hand, how many more trumped up charges will result? Sort of like the for-profit prisons needing prisoners which caused more people being sent to prison than should be sent.

Constable Sammy Scott scans the property of a home where he attempted to serve a summons. All of Scott’s equipment, including his vehicle, firearms and fuel, is purchased from his own pocket; however, constables receive a fee for citations given and summonses that are delivered and signed.

Failure to dim bright lights. A broken taillight. No seat belt. Those are just some of the minor traffic infractions motorists are being pulled over for in Cocke County by one of its constables. And for every one of those offenses, $22 goes into Derek Wright’s pocket.

From Jan. 1 to Oct. 31, 2011, Wright pocketed nearly $19,000 for his services — one that includes stopping drivers and writing citations.
[...]
But Wright, 32, said he’s not doing it just to make money. He also said he wasn’t aware he shouldn’t be staking people out.
[...]
But Cocke County Commissioner Phil Killion, elected chairman of the Public Safety Committee on Nov. 14, said he’ll look into the issue.

“Speed grabbin’? I’ve got my wonders about that,” Killion said. “If someone writes a ticket because someone’s safety is in danger, that’s one thing, but if someone’s sitting there doing a ticket-for-money, I have a problem with that.”

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I can put this kid in jail too!

A 6-year-old Grant County boy has been accused of first-degree sexual assault after playing “doctor” with two 5-year-old friends. Now, a federal lawsuit has been filed against the prosecutor, who attorneys said is trying to force the boy to admit guilt.
[...]
Attorneys for the parents of the 6-year-old, who is being referred to as “D,” said that [prosecuting DA Lisa] Riniker has gone too far by bringing a felony sex charge against a first-grader for touching a 5-year-old girl inappropriately while playing doctor last fall.
[...]
In justification for the charge, Riniker is quoted in the lawsuit saying “the Legislature could have put an age restriction in the statute … the legislature did no such thing.” The lawsuit also alleges the charges were brought because the 5-year-old is the daughter of a high-ranking official in Grant County.

Another article said the boy, if found guilty, would be put on the sex offender list when he turns 18.

What about all the baby boys touching their mother’s breasts? Clearly, they should be prosecuted. Ignorance of the law (or how to read or talk) is no excuse!