SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Congress just passed, and Trump signed, a law that makes all properties adjacent to the rail system operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Constitution free zones.
From TFA on zerohedge.com:
"In performing its duties, the Commission, through its Board or designated employees or agents, may: Enter upon the WMATA Rail System and, upon reasonable notice and a finding by the chief executive officer that a need exists, upon any lands, waters, and premises adjacent to the WMATA Rail System, including, without limitation, property owned or occupied by the federal government, for the purpose of making inspections, investigations, examinations, and testing as the Commission may deem necessary to carry out the purposes of this MSC Compact, and such entry shall not be deemed a trespass."
As we all know, the standard in the 4th Amendment is a particularized warrant based on probable cause, "reasonable notice and need" as determined by the cops (i.e. agency chief), is not the same thing at all.
We already have constitution free zones within 100 100 miles of any border, and this provides a convenient framework to do a similar thing along any rail line (or road) so the Feds can liberate the center of the country from any form of Constitutional protection. Anyway ... the 4th Amendment is already dead at this point, but its piecemeal demise should provide a useful education for those clamoring for the demise of the 1st.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Monday August 28 2017, @05:28PM
This line took me through a little emotional journey. First I'm defensive, because I align more with the left than the right and I know who you're talking about. You're talking about me and mine. But then...intellectual confusion, because I support the 1st amendment and generally prefer to move progressives toward respect for the expression of others, even when that expression is objectively and intentionally offensive.
So I've come to being supportive: yes, we need to take a good hard look at how the 4th Amendment has reached its demise to keep the same thing from happening to the 1st.
This is an important point, and one that I want other progressives to understand. You should too. But the way this is worded starts everyone at "defensive" rather than "supportive". So let's not say this by blaming others.
Don't even mention "those [people]". Just say "...its piecemeal demise should provide a useful education against the demise of the 1st".
P.S. There are other groups "clamoring for the demise of the 1st [amendment]" than the implied SJW. Religious causes, especially those wanting school prayer and 10 Commandments monuments on government property, work against the Establishment clause more often than they support free personal religious practice. But I highly doubt that anybody thought this phrase meant Christian statists.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?