Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
If the latter case, then Due Process (of the "substantive" as opposed to the "procedural" variety) would be involved, because that's the basis of the Incorporation Doctrine.
And that is the basis of their decision which is why I said what I did because I had actually read the ruling and not just the summary.
They are to rule based on law established by the Legislature and approved by the Executive.
They did. It's this new thing called "The US Constitution".
However, I still think that someone should not be able to get away with a crime on a technicality.
Good for you. Some of us actual value due process and police following legal procedures.
Due process is the principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law of the land.
This case was about the police not respecting the legal rights of the accused person hence by it's very definition it is a violation of due process.
The way to deal with police mistakes is with sanctions and fines. This is the way it was before the 1960s.
And it was completely ineffective. Sorry, but I'd prefer not to go back to a time where due process and warrants were afterthoughts.
But that's my point, why were they linked?
Laziness and convenience, probably.