Quote:
|
"Or some such"? Let's try to be more precise when discussing important legal principles.
|
I was intentionally trying to "Bubba" it up a bit at the end, as an alternative to the whole "I'm not a lawyer, so hopefully if I'm wrong the ones who are will correct" disclaimer at the beginning.
Quote:
|
First, of course, it's a federal trial court case and therefore of no real value as precedent,
|
That may be a valid point for a case in front of a judge, though I wonder if it would be at the least persuasive? Is that the correct term? Regardless, it does seem to meet the standard you yourself set:
Quote:
|
It's your claim that the questionnaire violates one or more constitutionally protected rights. Therefore, it's your burden to support that claim. The reality is that the question has been asked. You now challenge the legality of asking the question, so it's up to you to make that stick.
|
and
Quote:
|
When you get a federal judge to buy your analyses, let us know. In the meantime, you've not made your case.
|
Although I should also point out that your characterization of my claim is not strictly accurate which is understandable as I haven't clearly and concisely made an actual claim.
Were I to do so, I would say that such a question, if not related to the case being summoned for, could and probably would violate some level of Constitutional protection. As someone ahead of me metioned the 4th amedment, and it made some logical sense, I ran with that exploring and hypothesizing in a discutions format. In
Post #11 I had already allowed there may be cases at some past, present, or future time where the questions might be relevant. In
Post #35 I pointed out and added to the discussion that the fourth and fifth amendments may not apply, because of some distinction between civil and criminal actions as per a Cato paper. I had already alluded to some of this distinction in regards to the 5th amendment when I pointed out the need for risk.
You will undoubtedly disagree, but what I found most interesting was the decision was based - at least in part - in the 14th amendment, like Shelley v Kraemer.