Comments on: My Own Analysis of the Case of the Strip-Searched Ten-Year-Old http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/ Harangues that just make sense Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:08:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: how to file articles of incorporation http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-286757 how to file articles of incorporation Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:05:43 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-286757 <strong>how to file articles of incorporation...</strong> Free Online Vedios www.flashgamesz.net/mediacentre... how to file articles of incorporation…

Free Online Vedios http://www.flashgamesz.net/mediacentre...

]]> By: Confirm Them » Chertoff was Wrong http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-28469 Confirm Them » Chertoff was Wrong Tue, 20 Dec 2005 21:46:53 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-28469 [...] UPDATE #4: Patterico has a somewhat different view from mine regarding Doe v. Groody. 201 responses to 'Chertoff was Wrong'. RSS feed for comments and Trackback URI for 'Chertoff was Wrong'. [...] [...] UPDATE #4: Patterico has a somewhat different view from mine regarding Doe v. Groody. 201 responses to ‘Chertoff was Wrong’. RSS feed for comments and Trackback URI for ‘Chertoff was Wrong’. [...]

]]> By: Andrew http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-27197 Andrew Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:15:30 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-27197 This is a very good analysis of Groody. Thanks. I've blogrolled this particular post at confirmthem. This is a very good analysis of Groody. Thanks. I’ve blogrolled this particular post at confirmthem.

]]> By: Confirm Them » Ralph Neas on the Alito Nomination http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-27194 Confirm Them » Ralph Neas on the Alito Nomination Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:51:34 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-27194 [...] UPDATE: Associated Press reports that the truthfulness of a PFAW ad is being challenged. The ad emphasizes Alito’s dissent in Doe v. Groody, and implies that Alito’s dissent was rejected by the majority because the dissent was “extreme” (actually Alito’s dissent was rejected due to a technical difference of opinion about whether an affidavit had been incorporated into a search warrant). Back in October, John Hinderaker analyzed this case in detail, over at Power Line, and Patterico followed up with further analysis. 52 responses to 'Ralph Neas on the Alito Nomination'. RSS feed for comments and Trackback URI for 'Ralph Neas on the Alito Nomination'. [...] [...] UPDATE: Associated Press reports that the truthfulness of a PFAW ad is being challenged. The ad emphasizes Alito’s dissent in Doe v. Groody, and implies that Alito’s dissent was rejected by the majority because the dissent was “extreme” (actually Alito’s dissent was rejected due to a technical difference of opinion about whether an affidavit had been incorporated into a search warrant). Back in October, John Hinderaker analyzed this case in detail, over at Power Line, and Patterico followed up with further analysis. 52 responses to ‘Ralph Neas on the Alito Nomination’. RSS feed for comments and Trackback URI for ‘Ralph Neas on the Alito Nomination’. [...]

]]> By: Trish http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-26402 Trish Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:56:20 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-26402 This was very informative even for a layman. Interesting read. Thanks. This was very informative even for a layman. Interesting read. Thanks.

]]> By: mike http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-25788 mike Thu, 03 Nov 2005 04:26:37 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-25788 Alito's analysis of filling out official forms is spot on. Unless it's a form you do hourly, what happens is that there is a place to say the facts and your intentions. You put your thought into this. Then you have the questions to make sure you gave answer to the interrogatory already addressed. You have a question where, in this case, there isn't space. You are already affected by the diminshing returns of this redundancy and then have the extra task of answering a redundant question where the form maker has been affected by a similar rule of diminshing returns and hasn't made it convenient to do so. You get distracted facing the new, now twin task, and omit it. Alito cleared these hurdles like a good horse. Alito’s analysis of filling out official forms is spot on. Unless it’s a form you do hourly, what happens is that there is a place to say the facts and your intentions. You put your thought into this. Then you have the questions to make sure you gave answer to the interrogatory already addressed. You have a question where, in this case, there isn’t space. You are already affected by the diminshing returns of this redundancy and then have the extra task of answering a redundant question where the form maker has been affected by a similar rule of diminshing returns and hasn’t made it convenient to do so. You get distracted facing the new, now twin task, and omit it. Alito cleared these hurdles like a good horse.

]]> By: aphrael http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-25752 aphrael Wed, 02 Nov 2005 20:04:03 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-25752 Patterico - nothing annoys me about the press corps more than their habit of reporting on supreme court decisions without having read them, and thereby grossly misrepresenting both the legal reasoning and, often, the outcome. Your ironclad rule is a good one. Patterico - nothing annoys me about the press corps more than their habit of reporting on supreme court decisions without having read them, and thereby grossly misrepresenting both the legal reasoning and, often, the outcome.

Your ironclad rule is a good one.

]]> By: TNugent http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-25750 TNugent Wed, 02 Nov 2005 19:57:39 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-25750 Now, to get your analysis into page A1 articles in the Washington Post, LATime and [chokes with laughter, loses drink through nose onto keyboard] The NYTimes. Now, to get your analysis into page A1 articles in the Washington Post, LATime and [chokes with laughter, loses drink through nose onto keyboard] The NYTimes.

]]> By: Crank http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-25746 Crank Wed, 02 Nov 2005 19:16:57 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-25746 Of course, to the average layperson, the point here is that the majority ruled that police officers could be sued for forgetting to check a box on a form after swearing out an affidavit telling the judge exactly what they wanted to do. In other words, precisely the kind of hypertechnical approach to police work that a lot of people think of as a principal symptom of federal courts run amok. We conservatives shouldn't be afraid to underline this point. That said, I think you're right at least about what the rule <em>should</em> be: a bright-line rule that says the people to be searched absolutely needs to be on the warrant so the judge and the occupants see it. But it doesn't seem unreasonable to hold that this may not have been the black-letter rule before this case. Of course, to the average layperson, the point here is that the majority ruled that police officers could be sued for forgetting to check a box on a form after swearing out an affidavit telling the judge exactly what they wanted to do. In other words, precisely the kind of hypertechnical approach to police work that a lot of people think of as a principal symptom of federal courts run amok. We conservatives shouldn’t be afraid to underline this point.

That said, I think you’re right at least about what the rule should be: a bright-line rule that says the people to be searched absolutely needs to be on the warrant so the judge and the occupants see it. But it doesn’t seem unreasonable to hold that this may not have been the black-letter rule before this case.

]]> By: Patterico http://patterico.com/2005/11/02/my-own-analysis-of-the-case-of-the-strip-searched-ten-year-old/#comment-25744 Patterico Wed, 02 Nov 2005 18:56:05 +0000 http://patterico.com/?p=3889#comment-25744 <i>Don’t you mean “2) if not”? </i> Yes. Thank you. Fixed. Don’t you mean “2) if not”?

Yes. Thank you. Fixed.

]]>