#Fourth Amendment

[defensive-tactics]

Someone finally got it right...

[odinsblog]

An internet and privacy watchdog has a warning: Your car is tracking you, and it’s collecting far more information than it needs just to get you where you’re going.

Mozilla, the nonprofit that develops the Firefox browser, released a report Wednesday detailing how the policies of more than two dozen car manufacturers allow for the collection, storage and sale of a wide range of sensitive information about auto owners.

Researchers behind the report said that cars now routinely collect data on par with tech companies, offer few details on how that data is stored and used, and don’t give drivers any meaningful way to opt out.

“Cars are a humongous privacy nightmare that nobody’s seemingly paying attention to,” said Jen Caltrider, who directs Privacy Not Included, a consumer privacy guide run by Mozilla. “And they’re getting away with it. It really needs to change because it’s only going to get worse as cars get more and more connected.”

Unlike Europe, the U.S has few meaningful regulations on how companies trade and store personal data. That’s led to a bustling industry of companies that buy and sell peope’s information, often without their knowledge.

Carmakers have a long list of personal information they say they may track, including employment and purchasing history, education, internet browsing history, location data, music and podcast listening habits, immigration status, religious and philosophical beliefs and health information.

(continue reading)

[i-am-q]

AOC committing homicide over defending the US constitution

[thatautisticlesbian]

isnt it silly that police don't protect you from other people. Other people protect you from police.

[jbfly46]

Using the Threads app gives it access to all of your data, including sensitive medical information, which is a violation of HIPAA and your fourth amendment right.

[back-through-the-looking-glass]

Yeah, nope. I am not a lawyer, but the constitution still guarantees that you have a right not to be subjected to unwarranted search and seizure. Don't let this be the next step down the slippery slope. The DOJ can say what it wants, but that doesn't make it true, and it definitely doesn't mean Americans should quietly submit to the erosion of our Constitutional rights and civil liberties.

[agentfascinateur]

The U.S. intelligence community is now buying up vast volumes of sensitive information that would have previously required a court order, essentially bypassing the Fourth Amendment.

#illegal

[polliantics]

Kilmar Abrego Garcia - Say His Name.

⚖️ 1. Violation of "Withholding of Removal" Protection (Immigration Law)

What it is: Withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3) prevents deportation to a country where the individual’s life or freedom would be threatened.

Violation: Abrego Garcia was granted this status in 2019, and yet ICE deported him to El Salvador in 2025, in direct violation of a legally binding protection. This alone constitutes an unlawful removal under immigration law.

📜 2. Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)

What it is: The APA prohibits arbitrary and capricious government actions and requires procedural due process before agency decisions are altered.

Violation: If the government changed or revoked Abrego’s protected status without proper notice or hearing, it would be a violation of the APA. The government would also have to show the action wasn’t arbitrary, which it seems unable to do convincingly.

🏛️ 3. Violation of the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause

What it is: The Fifth Amendment guarantees that the government will not deprive anyone of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Violation: Deporting someone without a hearing or notice, especially when they have a legal right to remain (as Abrego did), likely constitutes a denial of due process. This is especially egregious because it involved physical removal from U.S. territory and separation from his U.S. citizen family.

🧑‍⚖️ 4. Ignoring a Federal Court Order

What it is: The Constitution vests the judiciary with the power to interpret the law, and federal court rulings are binding on the executive.

Violation: A federal judge ruled the deportation illegal and ordered efforts to return Abrego to the U.S. Ignoring or circumventing this order could be seen as defiance of judicial authority and a breach of the separation of powers.

🕵️ 5. Misuse of the State Secrets Privilege

What it is: The state secrets privilege can be used to withhold information from legal proceedings only when national security is genuinely at risk.

Violation: Courts have strongly suggested that invoking state secrets in this case was not justified, potentially abusing executive privilege to shield an illegal deportation. This undermines transparency and judicial oversight.

👨‍👩‍👧 6. Violation of Family Integrity Rights (Substantive Due Process)

What it is: U.S. law recognizes the right of U.S. citizens to family unity, especially between parents and children.

Violation: Abrego Garcia’s deportation separated him from his U.S. citizen wife and children. Courts have found that such separations, when not justified by legal process or national interest, can violate the constitutional right to family integrity.

🧷 7. Failure to Follow Proper Deportation Procedures

What it is: Deportations require:

A valid removal order,

No legal bar (e.g. asylum or withholding),

Notification and appeal rights.

Violation: Reports suggest Abrego was deported without being told why, possibly without proper paperwork, and possibly without exhausting his legal appeals. That is a procedural violation of immigration rules and due process standards.

📜 8. Equal Protection Concerns

What it is: Though not explicitly in the Fifth Amendment, courts interpret the Due Process Clause to contain equal protection guarantees for immigrants.

Violation: If Abrego was singled out for removal due to nationality or perceived gang affiliation without evidence or process, that could constitute discriminatory enforcement.

🪧 9. Violation of International Obligations

What it is: The U.S. is party to the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT) and other treaties requiring non-refoulement (not sending someone to a country where they face danger).

Violation: By deporting Abrego to a country where he has a credible fear of persecution and where he is now imprisoned in a maximum-security gang facility, the U.S. may have violated international law.

🔁 10. Irreparable Harm Doctrine (Equitable Relief)

What it is: U.S. courts often use the doctrine of irreparable harm to halt deportations while a case is pending.

Violation: ICE’s actions disregarded this principle, deporting him while litigation was ongoing, possibly mooting or undermining the case entirely—a tactic courts frown upon.

[attorney-anon]

Don’t have time to independently verify right now, reblogging so I can come back to it later because damn does shitty criminal procedure piss me off something fierce

MANIFESTING

[socialjusticefail]

City is using these cameras for crime prevention.

[liesmyteachertoldme]

The recent reissuance of Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5240.01 approved at the highest levels of the Pentagon and signed into effect by the Secretary of Defense, represents a significant challenge to the core Constitutional protections that we hold dear. Here’s how it threatens these freedoms:

Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act: This Act limits the powers of the federal government in using military personnel for domestic law enforcement. The new DoD directive, by permitting the use of lethal force through military assistance in civilian law enforcement, effectively overrides these limitations. 

Erosion of the First Amendment: Natural health advocates, and others exercising their First Amendment rights, such as questioning the government's response to COVID-19 or the integrity of elections, are now being labeled as potential domestic extremists. This directive expands those classifications into lethal force interventions, potentially silencing voices under the guise of national security.

Fourth Amendment Infringement: This directive also allows intelligence sharing between military and law enforcement under emergency conditions, raising concerns about the right to privacy and unlawful surveillance.

Due Process Violations (Fifth Amendment): The possibility of military use of lethal force in domestic scenarios introduces concerns about bypassing due process protections before potentially life-ending decisions are made.

Were it not for being personally targeted by this very administration during the COVID-19 era, I might not even be aware or feel compelled to report on a topic that seems out of range for natural health advocacy or health freedom. Yet, this strikes at the heart of what it means to be both healthy and free: for the government to have the authority to use lethal force in emergency situations without adequate transparency or debate is something that should not go unnoticed.

As of today, I can find zero alternative or mainstream media coverage on this directive, and no official government announcement that I could find.

Why is that?

We need to ask these questions. The timing of this change, right before the election and while the South is under incredible stress and pain from these storms (which many believe may have been artificially energized and directed), makes this stealth move by the DoD even more concerning.

Given the extenuating circumstances, I feel it is my duty to warn you all. Please take the time to read the full article and share it with others.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzQXJZrFqmBSmHwqcNBCKCtRcVKk

Let’s do our best to stay strong, stay informed, and support one another. Remember, self-care and connection with loved ones is vital in these trying times.

Together, we will get through this, stronger and more resilient than ever.

Warm regards,  Sayer Ji Founder, GreenMedInfo.com

[exponentialjest]

Also, a good reminder to make sure you have biometrics for unlocking your phone off and that your pin code is not your birthday or any significant date to you.

Just because it's an illegal search doesn't mean they won't try. Make it as difficult as possible for them. Resist, resist, resist.

this happened to a 19 year old US citizen studying in Bulgaria. do yourself a favor and do not leave the country right now under any circumstances. and another reminder: do not under any circumstances give your electronic devices up to anyone who asks or allow your things to be searched without a signed warrant from a judge. you have a right to refuse any search and seizure that is unwarranted. you still have rights. do not comply in advance. they will use it to prosecute you for whatever they can.

[nationallawreview]

FCC’s New Notice of Inquiry – Is This Big Brother’s Origin Story?

The FCC’s recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry was released on August 8, 2024. While the proposed Rule is, deservedly, getting the most press, it’s important to pay attention to the Notice of Inquiry. The part which is concerning to me is the FCC’s interest in “development and availability of technologies on either the device or network level that can: 1) detect incoming…

[erebusvincent]

The Fourth Amendment still applies at the border, despite the feds' insistence that it doesn't. 

For years, courts have ruled that the government has the right to conduct routine, warrantless searches for contraband at the border. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has taken advantage of that loophole in the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to force travelers to hand over data from their phones and laptops.

But on Wednesday, Judge Nina Morrison in the Eastern District of New York ruled that cellphone searches are a "nonroutine" search, more akin to a strip search than scanning a suitcase or passing a traveler through a metal detector.

Although the interests of stopping contraband are "undoubtedly served when the government searches the luggage or pockets of a person crossing the border carrying objects that can only be introduced to this country by being physically moved across its borders, the extent to which those interests are served when the government searches data stored on a person's cell phone is far less clear," the judge declared.