News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed for police GPS tracking. Parent comment

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 ]