LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 130
0 members and 130 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 09-15-2005, 08:29 PM   #203
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,149
Absurdity

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Whether it's constitutionally required or not, the Exclusionary Rule is not a "right."
how can the Court make it a requirement then?

Shouldn't it just have said "rights shouldn't be violated and some consequence should attach when they are." When courts start crafting rrules, isn't that kinda sorta legislative?
__________________
I will not suffer a fool- but I do seem to read a lot of their posts

Last edited by Hank Chinaski; 09-15-2005 at 08:48 PM..
Hank Chinaski is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:32 AM.