Airport ID Checks Constitutional

chill wrote to mention the decision handed down from the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of appeals in the case of Gilmore vs. Gonzales. The court found in the government's favour, saying "We hold that neither the identification policy nor its application to Gilmore violated Gilmore's constitutional rights, and therefore we deny the petition ... The Constitution does not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation."

Comments

legality, constitutionality, who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because it's "legal" or "constitutional" for the government to do it doesn't mean we have to accept it.

It was "constitutional" and "legal" to own slaves, so what? Does that mean it's ok?

"Sorry, Mr. Blackguy but no where in the constitution does it state that you have a right not to be a slave to stop bitching you hippy, I know since I wrote it!" George W.

2nd Amendment supporters

[Bassman59]

I'm still waiting for the supporters of the 2nd Amendment to rise up against the tyranny of the government. After all, they're partly to blame for this administration.

Re:2nd Amendment supporters

[belg4mit]

The problem is that many of them possess extra-ordinary cognitive
dissonance abilities, buy into various conspiracy theories or in
some other way believe that everything is A-OK.

Well, that just about wraps it up....

[yidele]

for american democracy. Run away federal power, secret prisons, the death of habeas corpus, military courts, checks that bounce instead of balancing and now the effective death of privacy? You have no one but yourselves to blame. At least you still have your beloved second ammendment - you can always blow your head off. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin "If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking is freedom." --Dwight Eisenhower

Re:Haha eh

[HermanAB]

Sure, freedom of movement is guaranteed in Canada, but does Canada guarantee against having secret laws that the citizens are not allowed to read? That is what the real issue is here - having secret laws that you are subject to, are supposed to know about, yet are not allowed to know about.

Re:No particular, but any?

[Stargoat]

An abortion is an automatically allowed action, like all other actions. There are not rights in the United States, we should think of it more as wrongs. The government's purpose is to restrict government, not pass laws about what we can and cannot do. The whole purpose of the Constitution was to expand government slightly, so that we would all have one federal economy (ala Hamilton), and that was it.

The point of abortion is that it is between a woman and her conscience. All the Supreme Court did was strike down a bunch of bad and illegal laws. It's time we stopped declaring things to be illegal, and remember that Americans are responsible people who can make choices for themselves. Time to remember we are not supposed to be safe, we are supposed to be free.