🇳🇱
Well we are absolutely fucked, there foes the fourth and second amendments right out the window.
@freemo It's going to court, it hasn't been decided yet.
If it were though this would probably be a terrible thing for groups of people that are often abused by police.
@swiley The fact that its already gotten through as many appeals court as it has (and as of right now is the "law" and upheld by the courts in a large portion of america unless and until SCOTUS overturns it) is scary enough
SCOTUS is just the last desperate attempt to fix this injustice, remember there are many levels of appeals each one have a larger and larger jurisdiction up to that point. So its already law in a huge swatch of the USA as a result.
@swiley strictly speaking, yes, in practice, no.. interpritation goes a long way. the "Community doctrine" isnt a law that was passed that is being tested, it is existing precedence on the interpretation of the 4th amendment. The very idea is entierly fabricated within the court system and for all intents and purposes has all the effect and efficacy of a law.
The distinction between law and precedence only becomes relevant when you consider the cycle that can exist if the law making body (congress in this case) disagrees with the courts. The courts can add all sorts of "interpritations" like this that have all the same effects any law would so long as the law doesnt directly or explicitly contradict it (well even then they could but arent supposed to). What congress could do, however, is rewrite the 4th ammendment or create new laws that directly clarify the courts interpritation and effectively eliminates the "community doctrine" principle.
So effectively what that means is when laws and the constitution isnt extremely explicit there is usually enough room for the courts to create interpretations that have all the effect of an unjust law. Since amendments to the constitution are a lot harder to achieve than courts making a ruling on the constitution this effectively gives the court system a lot of room to "mold" laws into meaning almost whatever they want them to.
@freemo I'm definitely not a lawyer but that all this does is create precedent (which is a big deal, but is really more about how the law has been "traditionally" interpreted.) Only the legislature and the white house can change the law.