News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep Money from the Innocent. Parent comment

Re:SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep ... by zeveb on Wednesday May 03, 2017 @02:34PM (#14258724)
> Yeah, but he has a history of dumb contrarian lone dissents that throw some poor citizen under the bus.

That's because he interprets the Constitution and the law according to what he believes them to mean, not according to what he wishes they would mean.

In this case, he clearly states that he sees no constitutional requirement for the State to return property after it has been confiscated post-conviction (as an aside, the article title is misleading: this wasn't confiscation prior to or absent a conviction). The Constitution does not mandate all good things, nor does it forbid all bad things.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SCOTUS Rejects Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Can't Keep ... by jbooth on Wednesday May 03, 2017 @04:35PM (#14259802)
Well, that's your opinion, and Thomas's, but very frequently it's not the opinion of 8 other Supreme Court justices, several of whom also claim to be textual originalists.

The constitution does not mandate all good things, does not forbid all bad things, but VERY NOTABLY includes the 9th amendment. They put that one in for a reason.

[ Parent | on HN ]