A search referred to in subsection (a) is a search by a full-time teacher or school official, acting on any colorable suspicion based on professional experience and judgment, of any minor student on the grounds of any public school, if the search is conducted to ensure that classrooms, school buildings, and school property remain free of all weapons, dangerous materials, or illegal narcotics.

so it seems that this congress is more interested in teaching our students that they have no functional rights in the united states of america, that there is no judicial process, that they are less than full citizens, and that authority figures can demand, and execute any search at any time so long as they are doing it to “protect us.”

on the other hand, we could could teach out students that this country is founded on a document known as the constitution of the united states, which includes a series of amendments, one of which reads thus:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

perhaps, i’ve just lost touch with what is reasonable…

at least when they are detained and searched randomly as adults, they’ll be more comfortable…

it’s kinda amazing that it takes this much work to establish freedom ot t-shirt in america these days…

it’s hard to find on the news so far today, but the ruling itself (in ACLU v. NSA) is available here [pdf]

XI. Conclusion

For all of the reasons outlined above, this court is constrained to grant to Plaintiffs the Partial
Summary Judgment requested, and holds that the TSP violates the APA; the Separation of Powers
doctrine; the First and Fourth Amendments of the United States Constitution; and the statutory law.
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the final claim of data-mining is granted, because litigation
of that claim would require violation of Defendants’ state secrets privilege.

The Permanent Injunction of the TSP requested by Plaintiffs is granted inasmuch as each of
the factors required to be met to sustain such an injunction have undisputedly been met.59 The
irreparable injury necessary to warrant injunctive relief is clear, as the First and Fourth Amendment
rights of Plaintiffs are violated by the TSP. See Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479 (1965). The
irreparable injury conversely sustained by Defendants under this injunction may be rectified by
compliance with our Constitution and/or statutory law, as amended if necessary. Plaintiffs have
prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution.

As Justice Warren wrote in U.S. v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967):

Implicit in the term ‘national defense’ is the notion of defending
those values and ideas which set this Nation apart. . . . It would
indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would
sanction the subversion of . . . those liberties . . . which makes the
defense of the Nation worthwhile. Id. at 264.

today i stumble into a piece by one mike ferner, who has apparently been booked for wearing the wrong t-shirt.

“Hey, listen. I’m a veteran. This is a V.A. facility. I’m sitting here not talking to anybody, having a cup of coffee. I’m not protesting and you can’t kick me out.”

“You’ll either go or we’ll arrest you,” Adkins threatened.

“Well, you’ll just have to arrest me,” I said, wondering what strange land I was now living in.

You know the rest. Handcuffed, led away to the facility’s security office, past people with surprised looks on their faces, read my rights, searched, and written up.

and so, another saga begins. how ironic, that this should come to my attention just a few hours after writing about a police state…

update (2006.07.11): i’ve gotten an email from mike ferner, and, understandably, he’s buried in email at this point. i’ve sent him an “i wasn’t using my civil rights anyway” t-shirt (perhaps for his court appearance…), and offered whatever else i have available. the illinois aclu has taken the case.

shouting “president hu, your days are numbered. u.s. president george w. bush, make him stop persecuting falun gong” can apparently get you a federal criminal charge now, scoring you up to six months prison and a $5,000 fine.

i suppose this means my country will start building another fence.

announcing hotel lost liberty, a monument to former american glory and future economic progress that is to be built on the land currently occupied by one justice david h. souter.

plan your vacation now.

i wonder if any of the other relevant justices (stevens, ginsburg, kennedy, breyer) live around here? i toyed with real-estate development once upon a time…

the decision [pdf] is available.