High court throws out lawsuit against Ashcroft

Source: Yahoo News/AP

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that former Attorney General John Ashcroft cannot be personally sued over his role in the post-9/11 arrest of an American Muslim who was never charged with a crime.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Ashcroft did not violate the constitutional rights of Abdullah al-Kidd, who was arrested in 2003 under a federal law intended to make sure witnesses testify in criminal proceedings.

Al-Kidd claimed in a federal lawsuit that the arrest and detention violated the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures.

But even the justices who disagreed about the constitutional issue agreed that Ashcroft could not be personally sued for his role in al-Kidd's arrest. The court reversed a federal appeals court ruling that denied Ashcroft immunity from liability in this case.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110531/ap_on_re_us/us_supreme_court_ashcroft_lawsuit

---

Well I am shocked. Shocked, I say!
:sarcasm:

can't be held accountable for lying, stealing, using mercenaries, torture, seizing sovereign countries natural rescources, outing CIA officer, crimes againt humanity, spying without warrants, rendition, oh and bringing the world economy to a standstill.
They are the untouchables.

We get to join the military to kill and die. This is a very fine deal for a handful of people. It's a horrible deal for the other 99% of the population. But for some reason, that handful of people can manage to get a working majority of people to sacrifice themselves and their best interests to keep this little game going.

It's a puzzlement that would baffle the King of Siam, it would.

Must be nice.

An oath (from Anglo-Saxon āð, also called plight) is either a statement of fact or a promise calling upon something or someone that the oath maker considers sacred, usually God, as a witness to the binding nature of the promise or the truth of the statement of fact. To swear is to take an oath, to make a solemn vow. Those who conscientiously object to making an oath will often make an affirmation instead.

Why is this important?

Because in order to get a arrest warrant you have to swear an oath that the evidence you are giving is true. From the 4th amendment: "and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Violating an oath to get a false arrest warrant is illegal, punishable with jail time and fines. Conspiring with others in a pattern of corruption and lies with intent to break the law and cause others to break the law is a felonious crime, racketeering in nature.

We are living in lawless times with no constitutional protections.