I would like to have a better understanding of the philosophy behind the drafting of the HR legislation that allows for
search and seizure without notice, consent or a warrant, and would appreciate any light that a member could shine on this for me.
To effectively confiscate all firearms, you would need to violate not only the 2nd amendment, but also the 4th Amendment right against
search and seizure without a warrant based on probable cause of a specific crime, and the 5th Amendment right to due process of law and just compensation for property taken by the government.
Many argue that Section 702 violates the Fourth Amendment's provision forbidding unreasonable
searches and seizures without a warrant.
Not exact matches
So as the owner of a corporation, or as a shareholder in one, Section 3 assures you that your property — including presumably the property of the corporation you own, or the property of the corporation from which you derive dividends — can not be subject to unreasonable
search and seizure,
and can not be confiscated
without due process.
The most explicit statement of these limitations is in the Constitution's first ten amendments — the Bill of Rights — which guarantee freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly,
and petition, the right to bear arms, protection against the obligatory quartering of soldiers, security from unwarranted
search and seizure, the right to a grand jury, protection against double jeopardy
and self - incrimination, the right of due process, just compensation for private property taken for public use,
and speedy public trial by jury
without excessive fines or bail.
But that freedom is just one of many that we enjoy in the United States —
and religious tolerance is no more, or less, valuable than are rights to free speech, to bear arms, to be free from
search and seizure, to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise, to be tried by our peers, to have our day in court, to not be imprisoned or fined
without cause, to ensure State's rights, to be free from slavery
and involuntary servitude,
and on,
and on,
and on.
More
and more, Edward becomes informed on the questionable
and intrusive tracking, legal manipulation,
and data collection being secretly conducted by the U.S. government on not only foreign threats, but its own citizens
without formal warrants, court orders, or proper
search -
and -
seizure procedures.
The case, Howlett v. Rose (No. 89 - 5383), concerns a high - school student's claim that school officials in Pinellas County, Fla., violated his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable
search and seizure when they
searched his car
without permission
and suspended him after discovering alcohol in the automobile.
o Many of the MSN laws allow animal control to conduct a
search of your property
and seizure of your pets
without a warrant if they think you might not be in compliance with the law.
The FBI hacked into Ulbricht's computer to find evidence against him, which the defendants claimed as unconstitutional since it was a
search and seizure of property
without a warrant.
An officer is violating Section 8 of the Charter of Rights, the right to be free from unreasonable
search and seizure, in the event where they enter the domicile
without permission of the resident, or they refuse to leave after the resident revokes the invitation.
It also would have given investigators
search -
and -
seizure powers to obtain those records
without a warrant.
«If the demand is
without grounds, they can bring an application under the Charter that it was unreasonable
search and seizure... That could result in breath samples being excluded.»
I'm not seeking legal advice, but rather I'm seeking others thoughts
and reasoning on a case that has been disposed of already, which seems to be a violation of constitutional rights afforded to individuals against police performing illegal
search and seizures,
without probable cause, permission of the driver or «owner» of the vehicle or even a
search warrant.
Why an IRS levy to collect taxes
without a court order is not a violation of our 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable
searches and seizures.
The Fourth Amendment which protects all against unreasonable
search and seizure and from being arrested
and locked away
without cause
and the Tenth Amendment which gets to the other issue of whether or not localities are in fact following the law or not.
28 Mr. C. submits that the entry of the police officers into his apartment
and the subsequent
search of his apartment
and the
seizure of his property
without his consent was unreasonable
and therefore constituted a violation of his rights as guaranteed by s. 8 of the Charter.
Congress, since the beginning of our Government, «has granted the Executive plenary authority to conduct routine
searches and seizures at the border,
without probable cause or a warrant, in order to regulate the collection of duties
and to prevent the introduction of contraband into this country.»
However, as for the police's powers of
search and seizure, the SCC concluded that receipt of the computer from the school board did not afford the police with the right to conduct the
search without a warrant.
It also would have given investigators
search and seizure powers to obtain those records
without a warrant.
Surprisingly, Canada has gone the opposite direction of State v. Earls
and has held that seizing information from cellphones
without court permission is not a violation of the Section 8 Charter right against unreasonable
search and seizure.
Arguably, if the power given to police to obtain personal information
without a warrant or judicial oversight is contrary to section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms, which guarantees that everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable
search or
seizure.
The judge held the use of the device
without a warrant violated Andrews» Fourth Amendment right to be free from unlawful
searches and seizures.