Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed for police GPS tracking

Re:Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed fo... by andrewpi on Monday January 23, 2012 @11:35AM (#3500951)

I can think of one recent example: District of Columbia v. Heller & McDonald v. Chicago. Lower courts have been generally unwilling to embrace 2nd amendment rights in light of those two decisions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed fo... by dedward on Monday January 23, 2012 @12:06PM (#3501102)

Thanks.... some very interesting reading (sorry if this post is breaking hn ettiquette)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed fo... by tokenadult on Monday January 23, 2012 @01:21PM (#3501434)

Lower courts have been generally unwilling to embrace 2nd amendment rights in light of those two decisions.

[citation needed] And, yes, I am a lawyer, and I am interested in what actual cases you had in mind as you made the statement in your comment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed fo... by iamdave on Monday January 23, 2012 @02:44PM (#3501787)

He gave you one in his post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._Chicago

which points to related cases. Hope this helps!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed fo... by wtn on Monday January 23, 2012 @03:16PM (#3501946)

He was asking for examples where lower courts ignored McDonald v. Chicago.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed fo... by iamdave on Monday January 23, 2012 @04:22PM (#3502182)

In Ezell v. Chicago, decided July 6, 2011, the Seventh Circuit reversed a district court decision that the post-McDonald measures adopted by the City of Chicago were constitutional.

It's in the wiki entry. Under related cases. As I previously stated.

[ Parent | on HN ]