Legal question

jimmytrick · #1 10-01-2006, 12:55 AM

Has the Federal government ever tried to block a whole class of financial transactions en masse before. Seems to me to be a violation of the 4th Amendment. Unreasonable seizure. Why does the government not have to get a warrant on a case by case basis?

WaimanaloSlim · #2 10-01-2006, 01:39 AM

When I first read your post, I thought, "Yes! That's right!"

Then I remembered that this administration has violated several Constitutional Amendments without suffering any consequence. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

whipsaw · #3 10-01-2006, 02:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Has the Federal government ever tried to block a whole class of financial transactions en masse before. Seems to me to be a violation of the 4th Amendment. Unreasonable seizure. Why does the government not have to get a warrant on a case by case basis?

[/ QUOTE ]

They have to seize something first.

AlexM · #4 10-01-2006, 02:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Then I remembered that this administration has violated several Constitutional Amendments without suffering any consequence. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This and every administration since FDR made it seem so easy to stack the Supreme Court and thereby ignore the Constitution.

jimmytrick · #5 10-01-2006, 02:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has the Federal government ever tried to block a whole class of financial transactions en masse before. Seems to me to be a violation of the 4th Amendment. Unreasonable seizure. Why does the government not have to get a warrant on a case by case basis?

[/ QUOTE ]

They have to seize something first.

[/ QUOTE ]

My property is my property. My bank account is my property as are the funds coming in and out. Blocking a class of EFTs is essentially a seizure. Acceptable with a warrant. I think this is the most dangerous part of this bill as EFTs, previously uncoded, must, in order to enforce this law, be coded enabling the government to not only stop whole classes of transactions without specific review but to also to gather more information about our banking activities than ever before without our knowledge.

This is really bad, right?

Seems like using technology to violate the rights of the people, plural, on a mass scale.

Phil153 · #6 10-01-2006, 02:38 AM

They're not seizing anything, they're regulating interstate / international trade, which they have the power to do.

Even if they didn't have the power to do this, the banks are still the ones enforcing the blocks. If you wanted to get a block removed, you'd have to take your bank to court, and the legislation says banks aren't liable for blocking these transactions.