▲ 66 ▼ U.S. Citizen Who Deleted Phone’s Data Says His Prosecution Puts Privacy at Risk (www.nytimes.com) submitted 5 days ago by sanitation@lemmy.today to c/technology@beehaw.org 23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe -1 points 4 days ago (3 children) This started long before the current admin. This was in place under Obama, and I'm pretty sure it started with 9/11. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] megopie@beehaw.org 5 points 4 days ago The difference is that previous admins have just abused it much more sparingly because they knew that it would undermine the regime’s legitimacy if those powers got to much attention. permalink fedilink source parent [–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 4 points 4 days ago Legal Information Institute, Searches at International Borders suggests that the Supreme Court decided "searches made at the border ... are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border" in 1977. permalink fedilink source parent [–] irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 days ago Oh, yeah, but at least the courts would intervene back then. Now many of the courts have been corrupted and the ones that haven't are bound by precedent which the supreme court no longer obeys and courts above them that are corrupted. So these specific interpretations are becoming more and more common and not just against poor people who can't afford lawyers. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] megopie@beehaw.org 5 points 4 days ago The difference is that previous admins have just abused it much more sparingly because they knew that it would undermine the regime’s legitimacy if those powers got to much attention. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 4 points 4 days ago Legal Information Institute, Searches at International Borders suggests that the Supreme Court decided "searches made at the border ... are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border" in 1977. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 days ago Oh, yeah, but at least the courts would intervene back then. Now many of the courts have been corrupted and the ones that haven't are bound by precedent which the supreme court no longer obeys and courts above them that are corrupted. So these specific interpretations are becoming more and more common and not just against poor people who can't afford lawyers. permalink fedilink source parent