Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

mcclatchydc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 226 posts

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#201

Post by dllthomas »

dnautics wrote: post #196
doki_pen wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory, the supreme court should see through "loop holes" and interpret the meaning of the constitution, not just the words.

In theory the court should do no such thing. Judicial review is not a constitutional power but rather a power created out of whole cloth in marbury vs madison (Not that I'm complaining, I'm fine with the court doing this, but it would be nice if it were an enumerated power)

Judicial review is not an enumerated power, but "created out of whole cloth" is misleading. It had precedent in Common Law, and purportedly it was discussed as a possibility before actually being used in Marbury (at which point the country had only been around ~12 years).

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#202

Post by dragonwriter »

dllthomas wrote: post #201
dnautics wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory the court should do no such thing. Judicial review is not a constitutional power but rather a power created out of whole cloth in marbury vs madison (Not that I'm complaining, I'm fine with the court doing this, but it would be nice if it were an enumerated power)

Judicial review is not an enumerated power, but "created out of whole cloth" is misleading. It had precedent in Common Law, and purportedly it was discussed as a possibility before actually being used in Marbury (at which point the country had only been around ~12 years).

> Judicial review is not an enumerated power

Its not a separately enumerated power, but you can't resolve a legal case without first determining what the law is, including resolving conflicts between different laws that appear to be applicable, such as the Constitution and federal statutes.

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#203

Post by robomartin »

niels_olson wrote: post #172
robomartin wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure you meant well but I found your write-up somewhat scattered and lacking a logical conclusion supported by prior points. This is easy to do if one is writing with passion. I've done it too. If your point is that we will ultimately be protected by the Supreme Court, I think you are wrong. This is the same Supreme Court that enabled Obamacare, a law that allows the Federal Government to force every american to…

> We had to pass it to find out what's in it Er, is it so amazing that you have execute code and see the results of the running process before you can really find the bugs?

No, the right analogy is to have someone write mission critical aircraft embedded code; don't have anyone review it; run no simulations; hell, don't even debug it; load it on a 787 and say "we have to fly it to see if it works". That's what our representatives did. Ready for takeoff?

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#204

Post by dllthomas »

tommi wrote: post #65
Sven7 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solutions please. Rhetoric is easy.

The solution is to act nicer now and in the future. The solution is not act in more terrifying ways, both home and abroad. Don't torture and murder people.

I think this country needs to really (re-)internalize the importance of popular support, and the difficulty of fooling enough of the people enough of the time.

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#205

Post by robomartin »

jarrett wrote: post #171
robomartin wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure you meant well but I found your write-up somewhat scattered and lacking a logical conclusion supported by prior points. This is easy to do if one is writing with passion. I've done it too. If your point is that we will ultimately be protected by the Supreme Court, I think you are wrong. This is the same Supreme Court that enabled Obamacare, a law that allows the Federal Government to force every american to…

There is a stark difference, though, between a law which merely (allegedly) distorts economic behavior, and one that affects privacy. The former is only vaguely addressed in the Constitution, in the form fo the 9th and 10th Amendments, and even then the Commerce Clause gives the federal government much power in this arena. The latter, however, is very specifically addressed in the 4th Amendment, and there is no catch…

True enough. However, something like Obamacare has the potential to cause both massive economic destruction and massive violations of privacy. I mean, the government --the IRS!!!-- will have access to your health data. Sit down and think about what they could learn about anyone by connecting the dots between your Internet, phones and health databases as well as those of the people connected to you. I don't see much good coming from this. I hate to take a paranoid stance but I sure feel, rightly or not, we are living through a pole shift. Our country is being mutated into a beast few of us might recognize as the USA in the future. This really saddens me. I hope I am wrong.

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#206

Post by dllthomas »

rdouble wrote: post #135
steveklabnik wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few weeks ago, I was in Chicago, eating breakfast. I didn't realize that it was a national holiday. I came out of the diner, and turned a corner, and said "Whoah, when did a millitary parade happen?" Then, I saw the words on the side of the APC: "Chicago Police Department SWAT." To give you an idea, it looks like this: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kHTFUq0_Yec/T-s2AzxBmQI/AAAAAAAAHz... That's Nebraska, but it was basic…

I could see how Chicago PD could use that APC/Tank vehicle, but not sure why the Nebraska highway patrol would ever need one.

Well, I for one won't be speeding on that stretch of 80 any time soon...

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#207

Post by dllthomas »

dragonwriter wrote: post #202
dllthomas wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judicial review is not an enumerated power, but "created out of whole cloth" is misleading. It had precedent in Common Law, and purportedly it was discussed as a possibility before actually being used in Marbury (at which point the country had only been around ~12 years).

> Judicial review is not an enumerated power Its not a separately enumerated power, but you can't resolve a legal case without first determining what the law is, including resolving conflicts between different laws that appear to be applicable, such as the Constitution and federal statutes.

Not unreasonable.

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#208

Post by madaxe »

graycat wrote: post #131

I suggest that, on the question prominent in this thread, "what should the US do about terrorism and the claimed excesses of the NSA", there is now an answer that is unavoidable, rock solid, quite clear, maybe crystal clear, even if it does not address all concerns. Here in logical steps is the unavoidable answer: (1) Due to whatever in history before 1776, the US founding fathers gave us the Constitution. Soon they…

Except, you can view this in another light.

Yes, there's a 1-2 year timescale - but after those 1-2 years we won't necessarily see a SCOTUS judgment. There's nothing to stop complete martial law being imposed in the interim due to a non-specific threat (perhaps Ed Snowden and his super-secret cell of ninja-jihadist-nuclear-biological-ultra-weaponised mega-terrorists), at which point your constitution, its amendments, and all immediate hope go clean out of the window.

Then again, if a second civil war does end up playing out, it'll at least make for some interesting history.

Which people will hopefully learn from, but won't.

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#209

Post by dllthomas »

dllthomas wrote: post #207
dragonwriter wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Judicial review is not an enumerated power Its not a separately enumerated power, but you can't resolve a legal case without first determining what the law is, including resolving conflicts between different laws that appear to be applicable, such as the Constitution and federal statutes.

Not unreasonable.

Further, setting a precedent of resolving conflict between laws by saying "These conflict and the constitution trumps statute" is overturning a law as unconstitutional.

Re: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

#210

Post by dnautics »

dllthomas wrote: post #201
dnautics wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory the court should do no such thing. Judicial review is not a constitutional power but rather a power created out of whole cloth in marbury vs madison (Not that I'm complaining, I'm fine with the court doing this, but it would be nice if it were an enumerated power)

Judicial review is not an enumerated power, but "created out of whole cloth" is misleading. It had precedent in Common Law, and purportedly it was discussed as a possibility before actually being used in Marbury (at which point the country had only been around ~12 years).

how could it have precedent in common law? The UK has no such thing as a written constitution to be interpreted in quite the same fashion.
Post reply on HN