News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by gowld on Monday October 25, 2021 @03:53PM (#28992299)
Can you link to info about that?
Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by iammisc on Monday October 25, 2021 @04:05PM (#28992461)
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-08-04/biden-...

> The president knows this. He told the press that his administration had surveyed the opinions of constitutional scholars, and that most thought an extension would be unlawful. Yet under political pressure from the left, Biden nevertheless ultimately decided to issue the extension.

In other words: SCOTUS wrote words clearly indicating a ban would be illegal. By a technicality (expiration date), they didn't issue an explicit ruling. Biden did it anyway, while admitting he knew it was illegal.

Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by Spivak on Monday October 25, 2021 @04:18PM (#28992607)
Seems like a good political move though, now the courts actually have to make the administration stop and get all the negative heat from putting people on the street. I mean the supreme law of the land let an order they believed was unconstitutional stand because of their personal moral imperatives and empathy toward renters. Is it really that crazy to shoot your shot and see if they do it again? Like the whole situation is nuts — “I think this is unconstitutional but I’m not going to say so because the law is gonna expire soon.” If that’s really the case then you could rule the other way with a clear conscience since it’s only a few days. Taking a bet that it was a bluff with little downsides if your wrong seems like a no brainer.

And the administration gets to say they did all they could and it’s up to congress now.

Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by JumpCrisscross on Monday October 25, 2021 @04:27PM (#28992711)
> let a law they believed was unconstitutional

Nobody alleged anything was unconstitutional. The question was whether the CDC exceeded the authority Congress gave it. The Court declined to answer that question when it was first raised. It answered it, definitively, the second time, striking down the moratorium extension.

Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by Spivak on Monday October 25, 2021 @04:38PM (#28992824)
Right, my only point was that it essentially cost the administration nothing to extend it on the chance that they would decline again or vote differently when it actually mattered.
Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by RattleyCooper on Monday October 25, 2021 @04:06PM (#28992475)
At least with the eviction moratorium, it was ruled unconstitutional by scotus and biden doubled down and enacted a new illegal eviction moratorium.

Seems like they are kind of picking and choosing what rules they'll follow, and which rights they think people deserve

Re:Feds order Google to track people searching certain names... by mattkrause on Monday October 25, 2021 @05:00PM (#28993062)
No, it wasn't.

The Court originally declined to vacate the stay in a 5-4 decision. The fifth vote was from Kavanaugh, who wrote that he thought the stay should be vacated, but wasn't voting to do so because the moratorium was about to expire anyway. That concurrence is certainly informative, but doesn't override his actual vote to maintain the stay.

The second moratorium was quickly overturned, with Kavanaugh voting this time in accordance with his opinion. In any case, the administration did actually follow that ruling.

This is taken directly from the actual decision (the first round is discussed on page 4): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a23_ap6c.pdf