| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| NYCLU sues city over subway searches |
| 2005-08-04 |
| EFL: Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!!! The New York Civil Liberties Union today filed suit against the city to keep police from searching the bags of passengers entering the subway, organization lawyers said. The suit, which filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, will claimed that the two-week old policy violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and prohibitions against unlawful searches and seizures, while doing almost nothing to shield the city from terrorism. Riddle me this NYCLU: Has there been a terrorist subway attack in New York City in the last two weeks? So how can you say it hasn't been effective? It argues that the measure also allows the possibility for racial profiling, even though officers are ordered to randomly screen passengers. Yeah, go right ahead, Achmed. Not so fast, granny... "While concerns about terrorism of course justify -- indeed, require -- aggressive police tactics, those concerns cannot justify the Police Department's unprecedented policy of subjecting millions of innocent people to suspicionless searches," states the suit. Yeah, right. The NYCLU just loves aggressive police tactics. It keeps them in business. And terrorrist dude is innocent too... right up until he pushes that button. [Among five plaintiffs was Brendan MacWade, 32, of Brooklyn, who escaped the World Trade Center towers after they were struck by hijacked planes on Sept. 11, 2001. "I want to catch terrorists as much as any politicians or officials but this policy does not work," he said. Another plaintiff, Joseph Gehring Jr., who identified himself as a lifelong Republican, said he was disappointed to find subway riders accepting the police inspections so docilely. "Here we were giving up our rights to what was obviously a publicity stunt," he said. "We are becoming accustomed to having our civil liberties taken away." I'd like a little background on "lifelong Republican" and "WTC survivor" guy. I'm sure I'll find some because I'll be looking. |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #15 Well I am sure most ACLU lawyers have tasted one heheheh. I would rather ridae a Bi |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom 2005-08-04 21:04 |
| #14 SPoD: Exactly how does one go about riding a bile? You must've just visited the dried elephant dung terrorist threat in Paris story, eh? |
| Posted by: BA 2005-08-04 20:48 |
| #13 Perhaps New Yorkers will designate a special subway car for ACLU lawyers. No bomb searches will be allowed. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-08-04 20:29 |
| #12 If there is an attack and the ACLU stopped the searchs...every victim and their family should sue the ACLU for BILLIONS. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2005-08-04 20:24 |
| #11 The Subways are run by Corp. A public Corp but still Corp. You ride at their will, no search, no ride. You have no "right to ride" or an expectatation of privacy while doing so. The Subway is property of the Corp and can under the law tell you what is what if you choose to ride it. Don't like it. Call a cab, ride a bile, roller skate or walk. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom 2005-08-04 20:20 |
| #10 The suit, which filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, will claimed that the two-week old policy violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and prohibitions against unlawful searches and seizures, while doing almost nothing to shield the city from terrorism. Actually, I'd agree...I want to be "equally protected" as the next infidel, so on with the profiling that Raj justifies in #1! If they don't watch it, the NYCLU may well get a judge with a head on his shoulders and see "equal protection" like we do! |
| Posted by: BA 2005-08-04 20:15 |
| #9 If the NYACLU stops searches, and if there is an attack on the NY subway system, they may lose a lot of support amung the most liberal of the libera. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-08-04 19:36 |
| #8 Am I mistaken or wasn't this already settled in the courts last year? If not the searches make sense to me which is why the ACLU is all over it. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-08-04 19:03 |
| #7 Steve - unfortunately nobody told the Courts that -- specifically activist courts such as the 9th circus court.... Look for some activist judge to rule that the searches are illegal. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2005-08-04 19:00 |
| #6 I'm no lawyer, but I suspect that a suit that claims that because the policy "won't work" that it should be declared void isn't going to fly. It's the job of the legislature and executive to decide what works and what doesn't, and to implement the plan. Courts can rule on the constitutionality but (I believe) can't dump something just because someone claims it won't work. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-08-04 18:37 |
| #5 You dont *have* to take the subway. You can take a cab, or walk or [attempt to] drive. it is *your* *choice*! |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2005-08-04 18:19 |
| #4 MacWade's Will to Live Quotient: -9.9 (apparent) MacWades's Sanity Quotient:...... -9.9 (apparent) Gehring's Will to Live Quotient: -5.0 (estimated) Gehring's Ethical Quotient:...... -9.9 (apparent) Right to take everyone else down with them: 0 |
| Posted by: .com 2005-08-04 18:00 |
| #3 Looks like Mr. Gehring's a lawyer from New Jersey. |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-08-04 17:48 |
| #2 So far, nothing on Open Secrets for Mr. Gehring. I'll post it if I find anything interesting. |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-08-04 17:40 |
| #1 "I want to catch terrorists as much as any politicians or officials but this policy does not work," he said. So go after Middle Eastern men of military age wearing backpacks. Or does that make too much sense? |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-08-04 17:37 |