"Curses! The birth of the bleep and modern American censorship
" by Maria Bustillos
"The bleep of censorship invariably draws attention to the material it was intended to conceal; circles it, if you like, by loudly omitting it. Bleeping also serves as proof that there is a watcher: someone looking out for us in advance. In the bleep lies the evidence that you are being “protected” — but by whom? Why? And from what?"
posted by andoatnp
on Aug 27, 2013 -
Full opinion (dissent at page 33):
In what is arguably the most important criminal procedure case the Supreme Court has decided in decades, the Court today announced its 5-4 holding in Maryland v. King.
The majority opinion, authored by Justice Kennedy, held that the 4th Amendment allows states to collect and analyze DNA from people arrested (but not convicted) of serious crimes.
posted by eenagy
on Jun 3, 2013 -
The state of Washington has filed suit
against Arlene's Flowers, whose owner, Barronelle Stutzman, refused to provide flowers for the wedding of regular customers Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed. [more inside]
posted by roomthreeseventeen
on Apr 11, 2013 -
Today, June 28, 2010, marks the last day of the 2009-10 session of the Supreme Court of the United States. This day will mark a number of historical events
, not only in terms of the cases to be handed down. [more inside]
posted by valkyryn
on Jun 28, 2010 -
The Obama Justice Department has released
nine legal memos
from the Bush administration that assert broad extra-Constitutional powers for the president. The memos assert that both the First and Fourth Amendments may be subordinated to the needs of wartime. [more inside]
posted by EarBucket
on Mar 2, 2009 -
The dirty underbelly
-- I'm sick and tired of these hypocritical Hoosier legislators who think that my sex life or relationship status is any of their business. Do I intrude on who they're sleeping with? I didn't, but I'm going to start now. ...Consider this a call to
arms gossip. ...
-- Bilerico, a GLBT blog in Indiana, fighting their proposed state Constitutional Amendment to ban marriage and all other rights for gay and lesbian couples and families.
posted by amberglow
on Jan 25, 2007 -
Recipients of "Leaks" May Be Prosecuted, Court Rules
In a momentous expansion of the government's authority to regulate public disclosure of national security information, a federal court ruled that even private citizens who do not hold security clearances can be prosecuted for unauthorized receipt and disclosure of classified information.
The ruling by Judge T.S. Ellis, III, denied a motion to dismiss the case of two former employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) who were charged under the Espionage Act with illegally receiving and transmitting classified information.
The decision is a major interpretation of the Espionage Act with implications that extend far beyond this particular case.
The Judge ruled that any First Amendment concerns regarding freedom of speech involving national defense information can be superseded by national security considerations.
posted by Unregistered User
on Aug 10, 2006 -
Know Thy Neighbor
--playing hardball with those who sign a petition amending Massachusetts' Constitution to end same-sex marriage there. All who sign it will have their names and addresses posted on the site. It's the brainchild of Thomas Lang and Alexander Westerhoff, one of the first gay couples married in Massachusetts. A little more here, including this: ...altering the state Constitution is a big deal, and if the backers of this (or any) constitutional amendment can't find 66,000 Massachusetts residents who feel strongly enough about doing so that they're willing to make their support public, then maybe the measure shouldn't be on the ballot after all. ...
posted by amberglow
on Sep 9, 2005 -
The FBI has issued the first demand for library records
under the Patriot Act. The library in question is somewhere in Bridgeport, CT. The ACLU is seeking an emergency court order
to lift the FBI gag order, but they've been instructed by the gag to keep the person whose library records being sought (i.e., their client) a secret. What the ACLU has revealed is that the client is a member of the American Library Association (clearly, a front for terrorism). If any MeFites are interested in digging up additional details on this and start making calls, here's a good place to start
. What indeed would the FBI consider so threatening?
posted by ed
on Aug 26, 2005 -
A bill to repeal the 22nd Amendment
was introduced in the House a few months ago, though it seemed that no one else in the world noticed. Interestingly enough, the bill was sponsored by Rep. Steny Hoyer
, the House Democratic
But it gets better: the bill was cosponsored by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner
, who's made the news recently for storming out of committee hearings
with Rep. John Conyers's
investigation of the Downing Street Memo, and, of course, loudly proclaiming his hatred of the number 420
Oh, and in case you've forgotten, the 22nd Amendment
is the one that limits the president to two terms.
posted by greatgefilte
on Jun 14, 2005 -
"They have no business debating the efficacy of gay marriages, any more than they should be debating the pullout of troops from South Korea"
North of Detroit, a county commissioner and avowed Christian Conservative pushed a resolution supporting an amendment to the Michigan state constitution, declaring marriage to be a strictly man-and-woman affair. It passed in Oakland County's Board by a narrow margin. But the county executive, a longtime prominent conservative, won't let it go without a fight, and says that with an urban county seat, Pontiac, they should have better things to do-- like their jobs. Is a county board seat an appropriate forum to push another agenda, or should they be more concerned with fixing roads and economy?
Does such a resolution at such a low level of goverment even mean anything? Meanwhile, some couples are saying heck-with-it and making that trip 'cross the Ambassador Bridge.
posted by marzenie99
on Sep 18, 2003 -
You Have The Right To Remain Silent
Police can hold people in custody and force them to talk, so long as their incriminating statements are not used to prosecute them, U.S. Solicitor Gen. Theodore B. Olson and Michael Chertoff, the chief of the Justice Department's criminal division, say in their brief to the court.
It "will chill legitimate law enforcement efforts to obtain potentially life-saving information during emergencies," including terrorism alerts, if police and FBI agents can be sued for coercive questioning, they add
ready to talk or will I have to get my rubber hose and smash your face with my club?
posted by nofundy
on Nov 25, 2002 -
It turns out before the election, representatives introduced a bi-partisan bill in both the House (H.J. Res. 113
) and the Senate (S.J. Res. 56
) to amend the Constitution to replace the electoral college with the direct election of the President and Vice President. Contact your reps
to ask them to support the bills. If we're going to get electoral reform, it will be now.
posted by veruca
on Nov 12, 2000 -