Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Michigan Supreme Court: Law enforcement now immune to perjury
 
  • Locked thread
Rent-A-Cop
Oct 15, 2004

I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

Mercrom posted:

Aren't you always automatically under the umbrella of the fifth amendment?
No. The government (or its agents) can not compel you to testify against yourself. Anyone who isn't, can. If you work for McDonalds they can compel you all day every day to testify against yourself. They can restrict the manner and content of your speech, they could (and in the distopian future, will) quarter troops in your house. The Constitution does not apply to them.

The Constitution applies to the government. It exists to limit the powers of the government.

* # ¿ Jun 26, 2016 18:00
  • Quote
Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 14, 2024 05:21
  • Quote
Rent-A-Cop
Oct 15, 2004

I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

Mercrom posted:

Is that the point of the constitution? Or is the point of the constitution to give the government less rights to limit things like free speech using their unique authority to commit violence and take property? I'm honestly asking.
The government doesn't have rights. It has powers.

The Constitution exists as a check on those powers. It is, at the most basic level, a list of things the government can't legally do.

* # ¿ Jun 27, 2016 01:04
  • Quote
Rent-A-Cop
Oct 15, 2004

I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

 Words have meanings. In this case they have very specific meanings that have been worked out over 200+ years of jurisprudence.

If you want to discuss the law you're going to need to concede that words have a legal definition.

* # ¿ Jun 27, 2016 17:56
  • Quote
Rent-A-Cop
Oct 15, 2004

I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

Mercrom posted:

All the laws protecting property indirectly prohibit freedom of speech
How do you figure?

Mercrom posted:

Why interpret this to only limit the powers of government institutions?
Because there is no other way to interpret it. The Constitution simply doesn't apply to non-government entities. poo poo, until fairly recently it didn't even apply to states, and parts of it still (debatably) don't.

Mercrom posted:

The government similarly does not have the power to renege on an employment contract just because you plead the fifth.
Right. The government can offer you just about anything to voluntarily wave your rights, but generally cannot legally punish you for refusing to do so. As a government institution, a public employer cannot punish employees for exercising their constitutional rights (in most circumstances) where a private employer could.

* # ¿ Jun 27, 2016 22:51
  • Quote
Rent-A-Cop
Oct 15, 2004

I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

Mercrom posted:

But far as I can interpret it the first amendment only applies to congress. How can it limit other parts of government except indirectly through law making? And since congress also makes laws for the people, why don't those laws face the same restrictions?
Originally it did only apply to Congress. "Congress shall make no law" is pretty darn clear after all. Other parts of the Federal government operate because Congress funds them. So depending on how broadly you want to interpret "shall make no law" you can pretty much include anything the national government does, since Congress must legislate to pay for it. That said, the 1st Amendment has been incorporated to the states and is now a much broader right than the drafters of the Constitution likely intended. That's how America rolls though. Our laws are static. The courts interpret their meaning, and that meaning can change. I think a lot of the world gets a bit confused by that since, especially in European jurisprudence, courts seem to have a lot less leeway outside the US.

A few rights are probably a lot narrower these days too. It's pretty difficult to operate a private warship in 2016 despite the fact that the guys who wrote the Constitution obviously thought people were going to and made arrangements for it.

Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 00:23 on Jun 28, 2016

* # ¿ Jun 28, 2016 00:19
  • Quote
  • Locked thread
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Michigan Supreme Court: Law enforcement now immune to perjury