Quote:
Originally Posted by AdultPornMasta
OK, my Learned Juris Doctor, what is the short and sweet of this?
I'm not picking on you but you'd be one Hell of a lot better off by opining as to the effect of this case and ruling than posting the PDF. and requiring non-legal persons to interpret.
I AM on your side!
 |
Sorry! I get so wrapped up in this that sometimes I forget that there are people who don't follow this hardly at all.
I posted about it in November, introducing an article I wrote for XBIZ (can I mention it here without getting into trouble?) before the hearing and laying out the issues. You can read the article which explains the importance of these issues at
http://www.xxxlaw.com/articles/phili...adte-xbiz.html.
In a nutshell, DOJ argued that the constitutional Privacy issues - about whether the inspections would be unconstitutional - were not "ripe" because no inspections were going on or even slated or even budgeted - and no written protocols for them existed. They wanted to dodge the bullet and avoid arguing about that. All this justified because of their own decision NOT to conduct inspections, as fleshed out in an FBI Agent's affidavit. All this stuff is on my site under "News" in November. This judge told them to go to hell. This is the same judge who kicked FSC out of court in 2010 and got reversed on that by the court upstairs, the Third Circuit. He's been preached to and now has the gospel. If you read this decision, it doesn't even seem like the same judge.
- Joe
__________________
Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice. . . Restraint in the pursuit of Justice is no virtue.
Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964