The question in the case, King v. Burwell, No. 14-114, was what to make of a phrase in the law that seems to say the subsidies are available only to people buying insurance on “an exchange established by the state.” Chief Justice Roberts wrote “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” he added. “If at all possible, we must interpret the act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter.”
INB4 "but but but news for nerds!": yes this isn't for nerds but how come it will get hundreds of comments? must be relevant to
New Hampshire is continuing to lead the way in privacy. After becoming the first state to ban the use of automatic license plate readers, its legislators are now attempting to rein in warrantless tracking of cellphone users. A couple of false starts (dating back to last year) resulted in no changes (and complaints from app makers that the wording might make some of their offerings illegal).
But it now appears to be moving forward again after the implementation of some changes. The heart of the bill is this paragraph:
No government entity shall place, locate, or install an electronic device on the person or property of another, or obtain location information from such an electronic device, without a warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause and on a case-by-case basis.As Watchdog.org points out, the spirit of the law is somewhat undermined by the letter of the law.
There are noteworthy exceptions, many of which appeared in previous iterations.The other problem with the bill is a problem with all bills introduced by state legislators: it can't lock out federal intrusion, at least not in its present form. The bill states that it does not apply to "federal government agencies." So, if local law enforcement wants to engage in warrantless tracking of cellphones, all it has to do is partner up with a federal agency.
Tracking is permitted without a warrant with the informed consent of a device owner, unless the owner knowingly loaned it to a third party. You can track calls for 911 emergencies. A parent or legal guardian can provide informed consent to locate a missing child. The government can track its own property or employees in possession of that property. And alcohol ignition interlock control devices placed by court order would also be traceable without a warrant.
The court then held that it was reasonable for the agents to use the GPS device in Sparks case based upon reliance on clear precedent.Although this case appeared before the judges after the Supreme Court's US v. Jones decision, the events of the case proceeded that finding. This may change rulings in the future, but for now, the First Circuit has not made it expressly clear that tracking devices require warrants.
However, the court noted that they did not decide the issue of whether any exceptions to the warrant requirement exist for future installation use of the GPS device to monitor suspects movements. Therefore, future use of such GPS monitoring is governed under the United States v. Jones.
As such, the court of appeals affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress.
“Last night while at her home in L.A., Nichelle Nichols suffered from a mild stroke,” McGinnis wrote. “She is currently undergoing testing to determine how severe the stroke was. Please keep her in your thoughts.” Nichols, 82, appeared in the original “Star Trek” TV series, which ran from 1966-1969, as well as the “Star Trek” movies. She also played the role of Nana Dawson in the ABC show “Heroes,” and voiced characters in the TV series “Futurama,” “Gargoyles” and “Spider-Man.”
What this country needs is a good five cent nickel.