Breaking: Federal judge rules NYC’s “stop and frisk” unconstitutional

posted at 10:01 am on August 12, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

A federal court handed a big defeat to Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the New York Police Department today, ruling that the controversial “stop and frisk” program infringed on constitutional rights.  Judge Shira Scheindlin appointed a federal monitor to oversee the NYPD and “reform” the practice, although that might prove impossible:

A federal judge appointed an independent monitor Monday to oversee changes to the New York Police Department’s contentious policy known as stop, question and frisk, a significant judicial rebuke for what the mayor and police commissioner have defended as a life-saving, crime-fighting tool. …

Four men had sued saying they were unfairly targeted because of their race. There have been about 5 million stops during the past decade, mostly black and Hispanic men. Scheindlin issued her ruling after a 10-week bench trial for the class-action lawsuit that included testimony from top NYPD brass and a dozen people, 11 men and one woman, who said they were wrongly stopped because of their race.

Scheindlin’s opinion ruled that the practice violated both the Fourth and 14th Amendments.  Coverage of the lawsuits have mainly focused on the 14th Amendment and the disparate attention received by minorities as a claim of racism. More than 80% of those searched have been black or Hispanic, according to NYPD’s records.  However, the broader finding of a Fourth Amendment violation makes it almost impossible for New York to reconstitute “stop and frisk” in the future. The data from the police department, Scheindlin noted during the trial, shows how unreasonable the searches have been:

During the trial, Judge Scheindlin indicated her thinking when she noted that the majority of stops result in officers finding no wrong doing.

“A lot of people are being frisked or searched on suspicion of having a gun and nobody has a gun,” she said. Only 0.14 percent of stops have led to police finding guns. “So the point is suspicion turns out to be wrong in most cases.”

Here’s the ruling:

Ruling: Judge finds NYC stop-and-frisk policy violated rights.

CBS points out that the order doesn’t end “stop and frisk,” but how likely is reform?

Instead of ordering an end to the practice, however, U.S. District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin appointed an independent monitor to oversee changes to the policy.

Peter L. Zimroth, a onetime city lawyer and a former chief assistant district attorney, has been appointed as the monitor. In both roles, Zimroth worked closely with the NYPD, Scheindlin said.

The inclusion of the Fourth Amendment means that reform has to address more than the racial disparities in stops.  The right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure in that part of the Bill of Rights means that police have to have either a warrant or reasonable suspicion in order to stop and search anyone — even in New York. Either police will have to drastically scale back their frisks, or the city will have to criminalize a lot more behavior for pretexts to them.  With Nanny Bloomie in charge at least for the next few months, I know which way I’m betting this goes.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

low-information perfesser on August 12, 2013 at 10:37 AM

How dare you malign the power of the state you want to increase even more.

Tell me, if you can’t trust the police to not harass people for being black then how can you trust the army of bureaucrats you want to create “equality” and “social justice”?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Very well asked.

slickwillie2001 on August 12, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Oh yes, let’s do abandon the housing project dwellers to the gangsta drug-dealers. Never mind that the legitimate residents overwhelmingly support this tactic … let’s all hand the Sharptons and the Jacksons and the Dysons another win.

M240H on August 12, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Well duh. But the main question is, do you believe in the bill of rights or not? Reality shows that stop and frisk works, but it also violates multiple rights. Perhaps if NYC let people arm themselves? Nah, that would be the easy answer but might be bloody in the short term and it gives the proles power to overthrow the bloomers of the world.

oryguncon on August 12, 2013 at 12:04 PM

“Hello Kitty AR-15″

And searching from memory. First saw one on one of those super scary gun sites.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 10:50 AM

As if it takes an hours-long search into the recesses of the interwebs to find such a thing. It took me exactly 7.841 seconds to open a tab in BING, type “pink rifle” and get about a million pics through BING images.

Bishop on August 12, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Bishop to the rescue!
Very sweet.

verbaluce on August 12, 2013 at 12:05 PM

How dare you malign the power of the state you want to increase even more.

Tell me, if you can’t trust the police to not harass people for being black then how can you trust the army of bureaucrats you want to create “equality” and “social justice”?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Because I don’t believe that “the state” is an ever constant, unchangeable entity with a life of its own. So I have no problem with the notion that the state can be empowered in some ways and disempowered in others. This, I know, escapes you.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Wasn’t “stop and frisk” once official Clintoon White House policy?

“If it weren’t for pickpockets I’d have no sex life at all.”

—————– Brainfree / Rodney Dangerfield

viking01 on August 12, 2013 at 12:10 PM

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM

By the way, if you believe it is impossible for the government to change its stripes, why are you so easy to believe that the United States political and economic systems were able to shed white supremacy and turn towards egalitarianism on a dime after 1964?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Because I don’t believe that “the state” is an ever constant, unchangeable entity with a life of its own. So I have no problem with the notion that the state can be empowered in some ways and disempowered in others. This, I know, escapes you.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:07 PM

No, it doesn’t escape me – it escapes common sense and logic.

Yes, you can theoretically empower the state in some ways but disempower it in others but you can never escape the truth that power corrupts – especially in government. What escapes you is that “equality” and “social justice” policies create the exact poor conditions that are used – even by other liberals – to argue for a more powerful police state to deal with the unintended consequences.

As a liberal you believe that with the combination of the right policies and the right people implementing them and the power to not be deterred the state can work wonders on a society and economy, large sweeping changes encapsulated by the typical “equality” and “social justice” causes. But this is an illusion. The same corruption you decry in a much smaller scale in corporate America is unavoidable in a powerful government but you argue for it on a much larger scale in the federal government.

You can’t disentangle these things. A government powerful enough to give you what you have is powerful enough to take it away. A government powerful enough to transform society won’t be limited in ways you’d prefer. You want a government powerful enough to “end poverty” and “unfairness” and correct “historical wrongs” and remove “institutional racism” but you think you can control it within the bounds of how you define civil liberties? This is nuts.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:16 PM

I know I’m not as stupid as a lawyer and I don’t lack the common sense that those in congress do, but even I knew “stop and frisk” couldn’t be constitutional, except maybe in Russia.

nonstopca on August 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM

But the main question is, do you believe in the bill of rights or not? Reality shows that stop and frisk works, but it also violates multiple rights. Perhaps if NYC let people arm themselves? Nah, that would be the easy answer but might be bloody in the short term and it gives the proles power to overthrow the bloomers of the world.

oryguncon on August 12, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Very well stated. Once NYC decided to infringe on the people’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and nobody said anything, of course NYC became entitled to similarly infringe on the people’s Fourth Amendment rights, and pretty much all the rest as well.

Yes, citizen tolerance of government infringement on our natural rights is a very slippery slope indeed.

Harbingeing on August 12, 2013 at 12:18 PM

When I referred to stop and frisk as having being constitutionally questionable I assumed some judge had already approved it.

It’s sad that it took this long for it to be challenged.

agmartin on August 12, 2013 at 12:19 PM

By the way, if you believe it is impossible for the government to change its stripes, why are you so easy to believe that the United States political and economic systems were able to shed white supremacy and turn towards egalitarianism on a dime after 1964?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM

This is full of fallacies and straw men.

I’ve never claimed things turned on a dime in 1964. I don’t think anyone has claimed that. America was founded with a lot of ambivalence about slavery and America has moved towards greater inclusion of blacks over time with several “milestones” along the way. American culture has changed and laws and the exercise of power of the state in certain areas has as well for the better as it regards oppressing black people. If anything I’d think you’d be the wary one as it regards state power in creating “equality” as the state’s power has been used so long by racists to oppress. But instead you like the idea of that power existing in the hands of government – you’d just like it in the hands of different people.

White supremacy was primarily a cultural issue that white Democrats enshrined into the law and enforced with powerful government. I don’t think government did change it’s stripes. Government that is powerful will be corrupted and used to oppress. You can single out specific acts done by a powerful government that aren’t tyrannical but the overall trend is clear.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:25 PM

How dare people fight against police harassment and violence! Isn’t it there fault for being black?!?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 10:37 AM

How dare you malign the power of the state you want to increase even more.

Tell me, if you can’t trust the police to not harass people for being black then how can you trust the army of bureaucrats you want to create “equality” and “social justice”?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Thread-winner. Liberals instinctively dislike police officers because they see them as pawns of “The Man” who exist to keep the people down. But they share many similarities with other government bureaucracies, including those charged with administering liberal programs. There is no good reason to trust that a bureaucrat from the IRS, EPA, HHS, etc. will be more respectful of individual rights than NYPD–as the recent IRS scandal simply highlights.

Outlander on August 12, 2013 at 12:26 PM

The same corruption you decry in a much smaller scale in corporate America is unavoidable in a powerful government but you argue for it on a much larger scale in the federal government.

This just automatically discredits you. People deal with/are reliant upon corporate America far more than they do the federal government. And unlike the federal government, whose corruption is harder to hide because of FOIA and other (admittedly imperfect) transparency regulations, corporate America has to be compelled through the state to reveal its corruption, a state they virtually own because of the way campaigns are financed, and have been financed since 1896. To say that corporate corruption is “small” is to reveal a distorted understanding of the private sector’s control over people’s lives.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:26 PM

This is probably it. You might also enjoy her website. No need to thank me for the tip.

gh on August 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Good website. Thank you for the tip.

SailorMark on August 12, 2013 at 12:27 PM

By the way, if you believe it is impossible for the government to change its stripes, why are you so easy to believe that the United States political and economic systems were able to shed white supremacy and turn towards egalitarianism on a dime after 1964?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Let me put it this way. If America’s political and economic systems are still part of institutional racism and result in a police force in NYC (a liberal city run by liberals for decades) that is racist then why do you want this same system in control of your healthcare? The police are racist but the death panels wont be?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM

I’m sure she’ll have something new to say in light of the ruling, but Heather MacDonald would beg to differ with most of the comments here.

Who’s she?

Repeal all gun laws and there would be next to no crime.

Akzed on August 12, 2013 at 12:33 PM

This just automatically discredits you. People deal with/are reliant upon corporate America far more than they do the federal government. And unlike the federal government, whose corruption is harder to hide because of FOIA and other (admittedly imperfect) transparency regulations, corporate America has to be compelled through the state to reveal its corruption, a state they virtually own because of the way campaigns are financed, and have been financed since 1896. To say that corporate corruption is “small” is to reveal a distorted understanding of the private sector’s control over people’s lives.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Idiocy to the infinite power. No corporation has anywhere near the power or reach that the federal government has. And communist drivel to boot.

Please explain to us how any corporation is capable of depriving any of us of our liberties. And please explain to us what corporations have policing authority over our lives. And please explain to us what corporations have the authority to seize our property for compensation.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM

By the way, if you believe it is impossible for the government to change its stripes, why are you so easy to believe that the United States political and economic systems were able to shed white supremacy and turn towards egalitarianism on a dime after 1964?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Racism still exists, and Democrats continue to use it to their benefit. They’re just more sophisticated about it than they were in the late 1800s when they passed Jim Crow laws, or in the 1960s when they turned the dogs loose on protestors throughout the South.

Outlander on August 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM

I don’t trust them to not administer the programs in a racist manner, evidence and history is not on their side. That said, I would rather have the programs in existence and if there is evidence of racial discrimination (as was documented in Stop and Frisk) then there should be movements to reform the administration of the program. Not throwing the baby out with the bath water. I’m also not a black nationalist, so I don’t believe black people should leave the U.S. because it is a white supremacist nation, but always work to agitate and push for it to become less so.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Let me put it this way. If America’s political and economic systems are still part of institutional racism and result in a police force in NYC (a liberal city run by liberals for decades) that is racist then why do you want this same system in control of your healthcare? The police are racist but the death panels wont be?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Because, shut up.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

This is all about black and Hispanic crime. Acutally they are under targeted by the Stop and Frisk policy, as blacks and Hispanics make up more than 80% of criminal suspects in NYC. This is not about equal protection or privacy rights, it is about the ongoing war by black and Hispanic criminals on the people of NYC. The NYPD does not just randomly stop and interview suspects, it uses reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts in situations that vary. Blacks and Hispanics invariably get caught up because they are the criminal class of NYC and are less likely than Asians or whites to be at work or at home, where most non-criminals are during the day or night. The NYPD is not stupid, they see unemployable blacks and Hispanics hanging out casing for burlaries or robberies and consequently become proactive in their policing, stopping and talking to suspects, respond to descriptions of suspects then stop those suspects, and otherwise do their job to stop crime, not just respond to it.

Pleas see this:

http://www.city-journal.org/2013/special-issue_crime.html

federale86 on August 12, 2013 at 12:38 PM

The Terry decision for Stop and Frisk, set the bar for a non consenting contact at “reasonable suspicion”. This requires an LEO to be able to justify a stop and frisk based on articulable facts supporting his belief that the person has, is or is about to commit a crime. A mere “hunch” or profile doesn’t cut it. When the facts establishing the basis for the stop are presented to a “reasonable person” (not a fellow LEO) the observable and articulated facts must clearly support his decision. Bloomie tried an end run around this and it blew up in his face. It’s going to cost NYC big bucks for violation of the laws under the 4th amendment.

ChicagoBlues on August 12, 2013 at 12:39 PM

And this as well by Heather Mac Donald:

http://www.city-journal.org/2013/23_1_war-on-crime.html

federale86 on August 12, 2013 at 12:39 PM

Please explain to us how any corporation is capable of depriving any of us of our liberties. And please explain to us what corporations have policing authority over our lives. And please explain to us what corporations have the authority to seize our property for compensation.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM

You’re describing *potential* government power. And, potentially yes the government has more power over our lives. I’m talking about how most Americans *actually* live their lives. In reality, rather than paranoid fantasy, corporations have a far greater impact on the average Americans life than does the government. Corporations control the purse strings of most Americans, since the vast majority of the nation is employed. Corporations control what americans do during the day as they structure the length of the work day and work week. Corporations have the ability to regulate activity outside of work by drug testing and penalizing behavior they deem inappropriate, but which may have had no negative consequences on anyone. And unlike the government, workers have no ability to respond back to corporate demands on their life and time. If they do so, they are called “union thugs” by kind folks like yourself.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

The baby will always be a force of tyranny. There is no magic bath water that will turn the baby into something else. Human nature requires the baby to act against liberty. The baby has no reason or incentive not to.

History prefesser indeed.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:42 PM

This just automatically discredits you. People deal with/are reliant upon corporate America far more than they do the federal government. And unlike the federal government, whose corruption is harder to hide because of FOIA and other (admittedly imperfect) transparency regulations, corporate America has to be compelled through the state to reveal its corruption, a state they virtually own because of the way campaigns are financed, and have been financed since 1896. To say that corporate corruption is “small” is to reveal a distorted understanding of the private sector’s control over people’s lives.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:26 PM

What a farce. You are the one with distorted thinking.

More people are reliant on “corporate America” than on government because most people still work in the private sector you dimwit. Wow. Yes most people work for a living and draw a paycheck from private entities that provide value in a marketplace. What an astounding revelation. Of course this is greatly diminished under Obama where the number of people on government “assistance” has soared and the labor force participation rate has cratered.

But lets talk for a moment about corruption in corporate America. The most corruption in corporate America is it’s fascist and crony connection to government power. Obama’s administration – and any regime which supports large centralized government – is an enemy to small business. Obama is one of the biggest crony capitalists out there. Big Democrat donors and large business owners getting special deals out of Washington is such a common place story now they barely merit mentioning.

Government corruption is easy to hide and even when it’s revealed not much is done about it (like those phony IRS scandals that Obama originally assured us were egregious and would be dealt with). The government is rife with political paybacks and corruption and almost none of it is dealt with. Take Harry Reid, a man born into poverty who has spent his entire life as a “public servant” yet has somehow managed to become a multi-millionaire on the side. He’s the Senate Majority Leader. Take the city and political climate the Obama came from – Chicago. Again, rife with corruption that is only occasionally dealt with.

Now, corporations can be corrupt but corrupt corporations are easy to deal with. You think a corporation is corrupt you choose to go somewhere else either as an employee or a consumer. Problem solved. You think Walmart underpays it’s employees and engages in corrupt practices that’s fine. You can shop somewhere that pays it’s employees more. Or if you work for Walmart you can take your labor and skills elsewhere if you think they undervalue you.

Other than leaving the country there is no way to escape government corruption.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Please explain to us how any corporation is capable of depriving any of us of our liberties. And please explain to us what corporations have policing authority over our lives. And please explain to us what corporations have the authority to seize our property for compensation.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM

And yes, of course eminent domain happens, but the percentage of Americans who have had their land seized by the state under eminent domain is negligible. And, I might add, its something conservatives have no problem with when examining the nation’s relationship with Native American nations over the last 400 years…

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Idiocy to the infinite power. No corporation has anywhere near the power or reach that the federal government has. And communist drivel to boot.

Please explain to us how any corporation is capable of depriving any of us of our liberties. And please explain to us what corporations have policing authority over our lives. And please explain to us what corporations have the authority to seize our property for compensation.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Excellent. I was going to include this as well but forgot.

Most people may still be employed in the private sector but that isn’t the same thing as having power over your life. The federal government can do things to me that no corporation would ever dream of doing.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:44 PM

I don’t trust them to not administer the programs in a racist manner, evidence and history is not on their side. That said, I would rather have the programs in existence and if there is evidence of racial discrimination (as was documented in Stop and Frisk) then there should be movements to reform the administration of the program. Not throwing the baby out with the bath water. I’m also not a black nationalist, so I don’t believe black people should leave the U.S. because it is a white supremacist nation, but always work to agitate and push for it to become less so.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

So you want racist and harmful programs in existence because over time you feel like you can bend them to more just and effective ends?

And you call yourself a student of history.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Napoleon hardest hit.

John the Libertarian on August 12, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Oh and I forgot to add that the Frisk can only be done when the LEO can articulate reasons that he suspects the person stopped has a potential weapon on his/her person. The frisk is based on the safety of the officer and cannot be used as an excuse to search for other contraband.
I worked last night, cheers all. I’m off to bed.

ChicagoBlues on August 12, 2013 at 12:49 PM

You’re describing *potential* government power. And, potentially yes the government has more power over our lives. I’m talking about how most Americans *actually* live their lives. In reality, rather than paranoid fantasy, corporations have a far greater impact on the average Americans life than does the government. Corporations control the purse strings of most Americans, since the vast majority of the nation is employed. Corporations control what americans do during the day as they structure the length of the work day and work week. Corporations have the ability to regulate activity outside of work by drug testing and penalizing behavior they deem inappropriate, but which may have had no negative consequences on anyone. And unlike the government, workers have no ability to respond back to corporate demands on their life and time. If they do so, they are called “union thugs” by kind folks like yourself.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM

It’s rich that you bring up employers controlling what their employees do on their free time like use drugs. I wonder what the state does to people who use drugs? A corporation might fire you but the state will imprison and fine you.

How much have you actually worked in corporate America? All of your knowledge about the lived experience of it seems derived from crazed sci-fi dystopian future fictions.

Not all of us can work for the education racket propped up by the non-voluntary donations of working citizens and a system designed to push students into massive debts. But please, keep lecturing us on the immorality of “corporate America”.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM

And unlike the government, workers have no ability to respond back to corporate demands on their life and time.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM

See, this is where you fall down and twist in pretzel knots. Individuals are free to quit their corporate jobs and get another. We are not free, however, to not pay taxes or resist arrest.

John the Libertarian on August 12, 2013 at 12:51 PM

You’re describing *potential* government power. And, potentially yes the government has more power over our lives.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM

I would say potentially you’re an ignoramus, but there is no potential about it.

In reality, rather than paranoid fantasy, corporations have a far greater impact on the average Americans life than does the government. Corporations control the purse strings of most Americans, since the vast majority of the nation is employed.

This is just so friggen stupid. We’ll ignore the fact that the vast majority of people are employed by small businesses and address the mind bogglingly idiotic idea that corporations are more involved in the average citizen’s life.

Do corporations garnish my wages through taxation?

Do corporations restrict my behavior in public?

Do corporations require I be licensed in order to use public throughways?

Do corporations compel me to purchase products (ObamaCare!)?

Do corporations zone my property?

Do corporations restrict my use of said property?

Do corporations require me to cede a part of my property as an easement?

Do corporations restrict my ability to posses certain items?

Do corporations require me to be available for arbitration (jury duty)?

Do corporations require me to sign up for potential indentured servitude (signing up for the draft)?

Do corporations tell me where I can cross the street?

Do corporations tell me when I must get off the street?

Do corporations have the ability to take my children from me?

I would go on. Would you like me to?

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM

And yes, of course eminent domain happens, but the percentage of Americans who have had their land seized by the state under eminent domain is negligible. And, I might add, its something conservatives have no problem with when examining the nation’s relationship with Native American nations over the last 400 years…

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:43 PM

The government seizes my property every paycheck. It’s called taxes.

Lets take the price of gas. It’s a perennial exercise in stupidity when the liberals go crazy about evil oil company profits and their affect on the price of gas. Of course the truth is that the evil oil company makes a pittance in profit off of a gallon of gas compared to the profit the state makes in taxation on that gallon.

The government run school system is also another prime example. The cost and money spent on school since the 70s has skyrocketed with absolutely 0 increase in educational outcomes. Such a fraud perpetrated on the masses would not have lasted if it were a corporation doing it.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM

And yes, of course eminent domain happens, but the percentage of Americans who have had their land seized by the state under eminent domain is negligible. And, I might add, its something conservatives have no problem with when examining the nation’s relationship with Native American nations over the last 400 years…

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:43 PM

I wasn’t referring to eminent domain, although that is another power that the government abuses. And you are confusing racist Democrats of the past with classical liberals again.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:56 PM

This is just so friggen stupid. We’ll ignore the fact that the vast majority of people are employed by small businesses and address the mind bogglingly idiotic idea that corporations are more involved in the average citizen’s life.

Do corporations garnish my wages through taxation?

Do corporations restrict my behavior in public?

Do corporations require I be licensed in order to use public throughways?

Do corporations compel me to purchase products (ObamaCare!)?

Do corporations zone my property?

Do corporations restrict my use of said property?

Do corporations require me to cede a part of my property as an easement?

Do corporations restrict my ability to posses certain items?

Do corporations require me to be available for arbitration (jury duty)?

Do corporations require me to sign up for potential indentured servitude (signing up for the draft)?

Do corporations tell me where I can cross the street?

Do corporations tell me when I must get off the street?

Do corporations have the ability to take my children from me?

I would go on. Would you like me to?

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Next you’ll tell me that the government forces you to pay libfreeordie’s college salary.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Next you’ll tell me that the government forces you to pay libfreeordie’s college salary.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 12:59 PM

No, that’s some corporation doing that I’m sure.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:59 PM

You’re describing *potential* government power. And, potentially yes the government has more power over our lives.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM

I have Faith that you “potentially” exhibit your ignorance
with every post you make on this website.

When it comes to Faith, I often refer to a quote fom a man
you are fond of and quote ….see if this rings a bell.

“Faith is taking the first step, even when you don’t see the
whole staircase”

ToddPA on August 12, 2013 at 1:02 PM

And, I might add, its something conservatives have no problem with when examining the nation’s relationship with Native American nations over the last 400 years…

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Tell me libfree, who was it that controlled the nation’s relationship with Native American’s – was it “corporate Amerikkka” or was it the government?

And conservatives/libertarians were THE vocal opponents to the SCOTUS ruling in kelo v city of new london – you know the case where most of the libs on the bench decided that the state could take your lands and hand it over to an evil corporation.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 1:02 PM

No, that’s some corporation doing that I’m sure.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Why is it I feel like we deserve an honorary PhD from whatever institution granted libfree his PhD?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Isn’t it there fault for being black?!?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 10:37 AM

And you claim to be a college perfesser……

Barred on August 12, 2013 at 1:06 PM

I don’t trust them to not administer the programs in a racist manner, evidence and history is not on their side. That said, I would rather have the programs in existence and if there is evidence of racial discrimination (as was documented in Stop and Frisk) then there should be movements to reform the administration of the program. Not throwing the baby out with the bath water. I’m also not a black nationalist, so I don’t believe black people should leave the U.S. because it is a white supremacist nation, but always work to agitate and push for it to become less so.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

So, you can’t trust cities and states that have been run by liberal democrats for decades. You can’t trust Obama’s own administration (you’ve yet to ever really refute that he’s a big crony capitalist). So why do you have hope of turning these government programs into something you actually like? Liberals haven’t been able to do it after decades of running things. Obama isn’t even doing it. We’re going to have an even bigger liberal messiah than Obama?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Why is it I feel like we deserve an honorary PhD from whatever institution granted libfree his PhD?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 1:04 PM

I don’t want no PhD, honorary or otherwise, from any institution that would give him one.

It really boggles the mind that someone can be so incredibly obtuse. The government answers to no one, yet corporations, which are subject to the law just like the rest of us, somehow practice authority over all of us. So the government should be given full faith at all times, and all corporations should be closed lest someone get a good paying job, or something.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 1:15 PM

If it’s unconstitutional, the cops must stop doing it. This reform nonsense is just that.

dogsoldier on August 12, 2013 at 1:17 PM

How dare people fight against police harassment and violence! Isn’t it there fault for being black?!?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Good to see that you wasted my money. For someone who supposedly has a PhD in something to make such a bonehead mistake is unforgivable. An uneducated hick like myself can be forgiven such a mistake but an educated college professor, I don’t think so. You really took advantage of that affirmative action thing didn’t you?

Oldnuke on August 12, 2013 at 1:18 PM

It really boggles the mind that someone can be so incredibly obtuse clinically Retarded. The government answers to no one, yet corporations, which are subject to the law just like the rest of us, somehow practice authority over all of us. So the government should be given full faith at all times, and all corporations should be closed lest someone get a good paying job, or something.

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 1:15 PM

FIFY

ToddPA on August 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM

A side note: Over 30% of our land in this country is owned by the Federal Government. Think that affects land prices and affordability….yet Libfree keeps sucking big gov’s pr*ck.

CW on August 12, 2013 at 1:30 PM

By the way, if you believe it is impossible for the government to change its stripes, why are you so easy to believe that the United States political and economic systems were able to shed white supremacy and turn towards egalitarianism on a dime after 1964?

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Liberal scum and slave of the State… No one is preventing blacks from being successful except the totally f***ed black culture of total dependency, no family structure, high crime rates, drugs, out of wedlock children, gangsters, school drop out etc… and of course the White Liberals who are the financial masters of blacks… Yet despite this some blacks have been able to free themselves from the financial slavery of white liberals and their totally f***ed up black culture and become very successful…

Also there is absolutely nothing in our Constitution that guarantees or promises or event hints to Financial Egalitarianism… You are confusing the US Constitution with Karl Marx Das Kapital but it is expected from a communist scum like you…

mnjg on August 12, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Yes 70% of blacks are born out of wedlock. Own it.

CW on August 12, 2013 at 1:34 PM

cause it is a white supremacist nation,
libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

ES.

CW on August 12, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Yes 70% of blacks are born out of wedlock. Own it.

CW on August 12, 2013 at 1:34 PM

The only way to liberate blacks from their own social and financial misery, from the financial slavery of White Liberals, is to destroy the Welfare State… By destroying this cancer then a majority of them will be forced to work in order to survive and once the majority of them start working hard then they will succeed… Other than that there is zero hope for the self inflicted/”White Liberals” inflicted plight of blacks in America…

mnjg on August 12, 2013 at 1:44 PM

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM

I am actually happy with this ruling today. I have several reasons:

(1) Bloomberg and all of his anti-gun zealots (like you libfreeordie) have been thumping their chest about NYC’s strict gun control laws and how that has lowered crime. In truth the crime was lowered because of “stop and frisk” but none of those white Manhattan liberals (except Bloomberg) wanted to admit that so they hid behind the “we have strict gun control” argument. We are now all going to find if that was true or not. I have my money that crime will now jump like we have seen in Chicago were they have no “stop and frisk”. I guess it won’t be safe for Ivy League folks in NYC to go to Starbucks anymore….LOL!

(2) “Stop and Frisk” although did target the main cause of crime in NYC, young black males, I have always been against it. I always felt progressives would use tactics like “stop and frisk” one day on law abiding gun owners. The fact was it was more of a gun control measure than anything. Most of the time they stopped young black men it was to see if they had a gun on them. It was only a matter of time before some hot shop Prog like yourself would want to use that for the rest of America.

Note: I do not think Young Black Males commit crimes because they are black, in other words because of their race, but because of cultural problems in intercity African-American communities that are excused by Progressives and mostly ignored by most so called “Black Leaders”. Until those problems are confronted, fatherless homes, rap and hip hop music, failing public schools & school choice, hate preaching and race baiting, etc., mostly problems caused by people like you “Libfree”, we will continue to see high crime rates among young African-American males.

William Eaton on August 12, 2013 at 2:20 PM

any idiot can tell it’s unconstitutional My problem is it took so long for the “leaders” to see that.

oh and what they did in Boston on the manhunt is also unconstitutional as is all State’s of emergency. Either declare martial law or don’t but trying to fudge the two isn’t a workable alternative.

unseen on August 12, 2013 at 2:22 PM

I have my money that crime will now jump like we have seen in Chicago were they have no “stop and frisk”.

my money says a free society will always have a higher crime right than a police state because you know people are free and not slaves.

I’m willing to pay that price.

unseen on August 12, 2013 at 2:24 PM

And, I might add, its something conservatives have no problem with when examining the nation’s relationship with Native American nations over the last 400 years…

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Tell me libfree, who was it that controlled the nation’s relationship with Native American’s – was it “corporate Amerikkka” or was it the government?

And conservatives/libertarians were THE vocal opponents to the SCOTUS ruling in kelo v city of new london – you know the case where most of the libs on the bench decided that the state could take your lands and hand it over to an evil corporation.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 1:02 PM

And how did that Kelo decision work out?

From the National Center for Policy Analysis and Steve Stanek at Budget & Tax News:

Pharmaceutical maker Pfizer is pulling out of New London, Connecticut, where local officials have spent more than $70 million to raze a neighborhood of middle-income homes and small businesses. The company moved to New London nine years ago after receiving more than $160 million in tax incentives and grants. Pfizer promised more jobs and higher tax revenues if city officials would turn over to it the Fort Trumbull property, but the 90 acres stand empty. Throwing salt into the wound is the further announcement Pfizer plans to close its New London research headquarters, moving nearly 1,500 jobs out of town, says Steve Stanek, a research fellow with the Heartland Institute.

And

The place is now a vast wasteland filled with overgrown grass and feral cats,” said Bullock. “And now Pfizer is moving out of New London. The property is going to be abandoned.

That is what parsing the US Constitution always results in.

BobMbx on August 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM

Note: I do not think Young Black Males commit crimes because they are black, in other words because of their race, but because of cultural problems in intercity African-American communities that are excused by Progressives and mostly ignored by most so called “Black Leaders”. Until those problems are confronted, fatherless homes, rap and hip hop music, failing public schools & school choice, hate preaching and race baiting, etc., mostly problems caused by people like you “Libfree”, we will continue to see high crime rates among young African-American males.

William Eaton on August 12, 2013 at 2:20 PM

A couple of weeks ago during the Zimmerman trial, Hannity took a caller on his radio program. It was a black lady; when Hannity brought up the high murder rate among young blacks in Chicago, the caller went off on him. She said “that’s our thing, it’s none of your business!”.

slickwillie2001 on August 12, 2013 at 2:48 PM

A couple of weeks ago during the Zimmerman trial, Hannity took a caller on his radio program. It was a black lady; when Hannity brought up the high murder rate among young blacks in Chicago, the caller went off on him.

She said “that’s our thing, it’s none of your business!”.

slickwillie2001 on August 12, 2013 at 2:48 PM

Until the Welfare State is utterly destroyed there is zero hope for the majority of blacks in America… Only the destruction of the Welfare State will force them to get ride of the chains of financial slavery that the White Liberals imposed on them and they have happily accepted. Once they work they will start behaving much better, they will start to focus on rebuilding their non existing family structures, they will reduce the crime rate dramatically, and many other goods thing will happen to them… The problem is that financial slavery is addictive and that the financial slaves i.e. the White Liberals will not let it go because once they let is go they will never win a single national elections…

mnjg on August 12, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Has this ‘freak’ instituted one policy yet that has not been overturned by the judicial system? Remove the ‘halocaust’ issue from the equation and give him a Charlie Chaplin mustache, and this is what I imagine a milder version of Hitler would look like, a power-hungry little elitist who wants to impose his will upon millions, laws/Constitution be d@mned. At least the Judicial system is working at the local/state level – wish it would be working to reign in the federal version of Bloomberg.

easyt65 on August 12, 2013 at 3:01 PM

Why is it that municipalities meekly go along with these rulings? Were I Bloomie I would have my Corporation Counsel simly take the order down the hall and file both an appeal on the merits and for a TRO on the ruling until the appeal is heard and decided. One federal judge is not supposed to have this much power. You would think they would learn from that Judge Sand who helped destroy Yonkers.

xkaydet65 on August 12, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Until the Welfare State is utterly destroyed there is zero hope for the majority of blacks in America…

mnjg on August 12, 2013 at 2:56 PM

The quickest way to destroy that welfare state is to crush the indoctrination. The people that are most responsible for the indoctrination is the public educational system in this country. We can defeat that by breaking it up with school choice. A free thinking voter is what we need, not one that has been brainwashed since birth.

William Eaton on August 12, 2013 at 3:46 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

What’s your point? That the media, and people like you, have a double standard based on race? Why aren’t Nixon masks racist? Or Reagan masks? Or Bush masks? And the following quotes show what? People having fun at the expense of an elected official?

In one, the announcer says, “Obama’s gonna have to just stay there … Obama watch out for those bulls.” Another voice can then be heard saying “I know I’m a clown, he just run [sic] around acting like one [and] doesn’t know he is one.”

In , a clown can be heard saying, “We’re gonna smoke Obama … Obama they’re coming for you this time. Don’t you move, he’s gonna getcha, getcha, getcha, getcha!”

That’s racist!

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 4:01 PM

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

It was a rodeo. He is a clown. You are racist.

onomo on August 12, 2013 at 4:11 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

What’s your point? Trying to change the subject?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Beam, the spectator, that the rodeo act “was cruel. It was disturbing. I’m still sick to my stomach over it … I’ve never seen anything so blatantly racist in my life … If an old country boy picks up on something like that, imagine what a person of color would think.”

That Beam fellow needs his nappies changed.

Meanwhile, in sane world:

New Photo Caption Contest: Send in the Clowns

And then we have this wonderful little piece that is right up brainfree’s ally of government worship:

So We’ve Got a Little Kid Praying TO Barack Obama Now

NotCoach on August 12, 2013 at 4:21 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

Ok, I’ll indulge you’re attempt to change the subject away from a topic you’ve lost the argument on…

Want to claim that this is racist? Well, the report I read at your link didn’t contain anything that said it was racist – it just implied and insinuated it. But this is fairly standard operating procedure with any criticism of Obama – it’s all racist and bigoted. Any criticism leveled against Obama that have also been leveled at Republicans or other Democrats gets labeled racist. We saw similar things – and much worse – from the left regarding Bush. And liberals like you have so overused the cry of “Raaaacism!” that it’s now hollow. I’ll need more definitive proof that it’s actual racism.

So, we’re left with saying that treating a president in such a fashion is beyond the pale. Well, this is the political world liberals have wrought. 8 years of Bush-hitler, war crimes, assassination fantasies, burning GWB in effigy yada yada yada. All celebrated by the left and the media. So, a little of that is thrown back from the other direction and now it’s time to get the vapors and retire to the fainting couch?

Personally, I would not be comfortable at an event that treated a president of the US in such a manner. But I’m a lot less comfortable living in a country with a sitting president who disdains the rule of law like Obama, so on the scale of “things that bother me” this doesn’t rate very high.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 4:48 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

“I’m sorry sir, your race card has been declined….would you like to try with another one?”

BobMbx on August 12, 2013 at 5:23 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

lowinformationperfesser on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

“I’m sorry sir, your race card has been declined….would you like to try with another one?”

BobMbx on August 12, 2013 at 5:23 PM

Obviously the LIP sees this as a very important story. I wonder why. Masks of presidents have been common for at least fifty years. Every year at Halloween the stores are full of them.

slickwillie2001 on August 12, 2013 at 5:28 PM

ALRIGHT!

Nanny Bloomers fails AGAIN… (is anyone keeping a tally of his judicial SLAP DOWNs?)

Remember being defied with the BIG GULP at CPAC 2013, Nanny Bloomers? … when Madame Steel Spine struck the Liberty Pose?

YEAH …. get in the faces of these anti-Liberty, poor excuses for American Citizens …

#BeClingers —————> #AmericaRISING

exodus2011 on August 12, 2013 at 5:39 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

Take heart libfree. That rodeo clown has been permanently banned from any MO state fair rodeo performances and sensitivity training will now be required of rodeo staff. More people will be “held accountable” for this incident.

So congratulations. Behavior that would have been applauded during Bush’s years is now dealt with by permanently banning someone, “sensitivity training” and who knows what else.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 5:47 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

Take heart libfree. That rodeo clown has been permanently banned from any MO state fair rodeo performances and sensitivity training will now be required of rodeo staff. More people will be “held accountable” for this incident.

So congratulations. Behavior that would have been applauded during Bush’s years is now dealt with by permanently banning someone, “sensitivity training” and who knows what else.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Tangential employee of a state mocks POTUS and… is quickly permanently fired, with more to be held accountable soon and others to be subjected to mandatory training to prevent such occurrences in the future.

IRS employees systematically violate the civil liberties of political enemies of POTUS and…phony scandal!

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 6:03 PM

For gwelf: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/12/211324453/rodeo-clown-in-obama-mask-sparks-outrage-apologies

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM

Liberal America: where publicly mocking a liberal president gets you fired and mandatory training for your peers and illegally violating the civil rights of the president’s political enemies using the power of the federal government gets you nothing really.

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 6:07 PM

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM

What are you talking about? The political/economic system is still jam-packed full of racist Democrats. You’re not helping.

S. D. on August 12, 2013 at 8:08 PM

Well duh. But the main question is, do you believe in the bill of rights or not? Reality shows that stop and frisk works, but it also violates multiple rights. Perhaps if NYC let people arm themselves? Nah, that would be the easy answer but might be bloody in the short term and it gives the proles power to overthrow the bloomers of the world.

oryguncon on August 12, 2013 at 12:04 PM

It’s an amazing juxtaposition of rights versus rights, isn’t it?

On one hand, you’ve got people like Bloomberg arguing that un-Constitutional stop-and-frisk saves lives, but that the right to bear arms — which is Constitutional — is so abhorrent it’s beyond thought.

Reality shows the more legal guns owned by law-abiding citizens, the less crime there is.

Also, this:

How dare you malign the power of the state you want to increase even more.

Tell me, if you can’t trust the police to not harass people for being black then how can you trust the army of bureaucrats you want to create “equality” and “social justice”?

gwelf on August 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Gwelf deserves an award for best question asked of a progressive. EVER.

englishqueen01 on August 13, 2013 at 6:36 AM

So I have no problem with the notion that the state can be empowered in some ways and disempowered in others. This, I know, escapes you.

libfreeordie on August 12, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Well of course, the government shrinks, willingly gives up power and control and reduces it’s scope all the time.

Like um…. uh… wow, this is tough.

Well there was the… uh… nope, that was a proposal that never happened.

Wait, how about um…. no that was a 5 year lawsuit they fought tooth and nail… um.

Fine, I can’t think of a single time it has ever happened in history; but I’m fully capable of believing it to be not only possible but probable even if it never happens.

See, believing that things that never happen are common is just beyond you idiots. Once you believe that things that never happen are common and will happen a lot in the future, you too can be a liberal.

gekkobear on August 13, 2013 at 12:25 PM

M240H on August 12, 2013 at 11:26 AM
-
Indeed.
-
For those who have neither lived or worked in Gotham City:

The city’s murder rate peaked in 1990 at 2,245 — having risen rapidly year after year, along with all violent crimes, since the 1960s. By 2012, the number of murders had dropped to 419.

-
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/after_stop_frisk_5sJpB9w6hdxpT10wqWPspK

diogenes on August 13, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2