6 comments

  • fusslo 1 hour ago
    > The warrants included a search through all of her photos, videos, emails, text messages, and location data over a two-month period, as well as a time-unlimited search for 26 keywords, including words as broad as “bike,” “assault,” “celebration,” and “right,” that allowed police to comb through years of Armendariz’s private and sensitive data—all supposedly to look for evidence related to the alleged simple assault.

    That's an insane overreaction and overreach. There's some quotes from officers during the protests that are particularly troubling, too.

    The article links directly to the ruling: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/0101...

    I wonder how the Sargent and Judge who approved these searches feel. If they take their jobs seriously, I do hope that they are more critical of search warrant applications in the future.

    • stronglikedan 18 minutes ago
      > I wonder how the Sargent and Judge who approved these searches feel. If they take their jobs seriously, I do hope that they are more critical of search warrant applications in the future.

      I guarantee they feel like they've been slighted because they take their jobs seriously, and from their perspective they should have been allowed to do what they did. Power corrupts the mind as much as the bank account.

      • cogman10 13 minutes ago
        Yup. To see this mentality on full display you just have to pull up videos of cops getting DUIs.

        They all act like it's the most insulting thing in the world that they get pulled over. They all use their status as cops to try and get out of the ticket. The cops that pull them over always treat them in the softest and most deferential way imaginable. And I'm sure more times than there are videos for, these cops get away with DUI which is why they are so incensed when the arresting cop doesn't play along.

  • hn_acker 2 hours ago
    The original title is:

    > Victory! Tenth Circuit Finds Fourth Amendment Doesn’t Support Broad Search of Protesters’ Devices and Digital Data

  • jmward01 2 hours ago
    I think the top (tech) stories of the decade are likely: Privacy, AI and the energy transition.

    I hope that as a society we are starting to learn, and protect, the value of, and right to, privacy.

    • sneak 2 hours ago
      Germans have mass surveillance and they are perhaps the most privacy-conscious society in the world, because of their (relatively recent) authoritarian catastrophe.

      I doubt anyone else will learn the lesson without something similar happening. Even some Germans are forgetting it already.

  • mothballed 2 hours ago
    It's an awesome victory. But until the penalty for violating rights under color of law is something real (like serious jail + restitution, barred from further public employment, etc) they will keep doing it.
    • patrickmay 2 hours ago
      A good start would be requiring police officers to carry individual liability insurance so that municipalities aren't paying for these lawsuits. If someone can't get insurance, they can no longer be a cop.
      • SoftTalker 1 hour ago
        It's going to be cheaper for municipalites to have group insurance for this (or self-insure) than to have to pay the police enough that they can afford their own insurance.
        • JoshTriplett 43 minutes ago
          The whole point of requiring individual insurance is precisely that insurance will be too expensive for people who are demonstrably high risk in that role, and less expensive for people who are low risk.
        • Zigurd 29 minutes ago
          If it's uninsurable in the private market, that's a hint. Maybe they could pledge the pension fund.
        • mothballed 1 hour ago
          Ultimately it's the civil authorities and upper brass that want these intrusions. The insurance issue is easily worked around by hiring green recruits at a very high "bonus" to be used as basically burner employees to burn through their insurance and do the illegal stuff under their identity.

          It has to be a criminal thing because the top brass and civil servants need RICO like prosecution and tossed in jail along with the guy who gets the insurance ding.

          • lazide 1 hour ago
            It’s already a (very real) crime to do a Conspiracy to deprive someone of their civil rights, which is what you’re talking about. Occasionally someone gets sued under it, but it’s rare.
      • sneak 1 hour ago
        I don’t disagree, but can we really claim to have the rule of law if there is a class of people who can flagrantly violate criminal law and court orders and suffer zero criminal consequences?
  • JohnTHaller 1 hour ago
    The Republican administration will ignore this court order as well
    • RajT88 1 hour ago
      Indeed. Who holds the government accountable to its own laws?
      • garciasn 51 minutes ago
        Congress < Supreme Court < The People

        We've had a significant breakdown in process here. Congress is deadlocked. The Supreme Court is corrupt. The only thing left are The People (protest / vote < civil disobedience < escalation beyond).

        • lemoncucumber 12 minutes ago
          You’ve got the first two backwards. The real accountability mechanism in the constitution for a rogue president/administration is impeachment by congress (which is a proxy for the people in theory). Unfortunately neither enough of congress nor enough of the electorate cares if the administration breaks the law.
    • stebalien 1 hour ago
      The case was filed in 2023.
  • shablulman 2 hours ago
    [dead]