Supreme Court Rules on Warrantless Search

[zipplewrath]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2071763,00.html

"Voting 8-1, the justices reversed a Kentucky Supreme Court ruling that threw out the evidence gathered when officers entered Hollis King's apartment.

The court said there was no violation of King's constitutional rights because the police acted reasonably. Only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented.

Officers knocked on King's door in Lexington and thought they heard noises that indicated whoever was inside was trying to get rid of incriminating evidence.

Justice Samuel Alito said in his opinion for the court that people have no obligation to respond to the knock or, if they do open the door, allow the police to come in. In those cases, officers who wanted to gain entry would have to persuade a judge to issue a search warrant."

Sure am glad we elected democrat for president so he could nominate fierce liberals that vote with Scalia and Roberts against Ginsburg to make it easier for cops to forcibly enter our homes. That's really moving the court to the left ain't it?

[thereismore]

1. Yeah, blame Obama.

:crazy:

[villager]

3. I trust we *can* hold the justices responsible for their votes?

Or are the Democratic-appointed ones somehow off the hook? :shrug:

[zipplewrath]

5. He did appoint them right?

Some of us weren't all that impressed with them, but we were suppose to be happy because of their ethnicity. Yes, I hold him responsible for not appointing more clearly left leaning judges.

[JoeyT]

6. Sure thing!

Remember when a bunch of us were nervous because we thought they sucked on civil liberties issues? Then a bunch of people insisted we were imagining things?

Yeah, this is what we were talking about. There's no one to blame BUT Obama.

[defendandprotect]

2. "Only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented" -- Wow!!

[jp11]

4. This court gets it, and by it I mean the idea that our rights don't exist when there is

any perceived crime or threat that 'must be dealt with'.