Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Fourth Amendment Suit for Deleting a Picture from Plaintiff’s Camera. Kerr @ Volokh

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin

    Fourth Amendment Suit for Deleting a Picture from Plaintiff’s Camera. Kerr @ Volokh

    "The next question is whether McIntyre’s deletion of the photograph of his own license plate from the digital storage device of plaintiff’s camera constituted an unlawful seizure of plaintiff’s property in violation of the Fourth Amendment. McIntyre does not even attempt to argue that his actions did not constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Instead, he asserts that, even if there was a violation of plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights, it is not actionable because it caused only de minimis injury. Indeed, the Supreme Court has acknowledged that there is “a de minimis level of imposition with which the Constitution is not concerned.” Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 674, 97 S.Ct. 1401, 51 L.Ed.2d 711 (1977). McIntyre relies upon three Fourth Amendment cases to support his argument that the deletion of plaintiff’s photograph was only a de minimis violation."

    Just a little bit of information was deleted. The Leviathan protects itself.
    If TRUMP 2016 loses then I will shrug off my WHITE MAN'S BURDEN and leave the world to the Dindus and Done Nuffins. Read and understand Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged as a prescription for the future. TRUMP 2016

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    earth's crust
    the police had received various complaints that the plaintiff was causing concern because he was taking pictures of lots of people and cars in town

    So if we start deleting the cop's photographs of cars, that too would not be an issue?

    Oh wait, I don't think so...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts