WSJ sticks up for UBS: "Apart from the diplomatic ramifications, the government's request for so broad a swath of information could well run afoul of the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable search. The Obama Administration should use the court reprieve to rethink the whole case."
1. Not sure where it falls, but when someone commits a crime the government has a reason to gather information. Its my understanding that UBS broke the law. If a warrant exists how can that be 4th Amendment?
2. The Fourth Amendment relates to people not organizations.
3. The Fourth Amendment does not apply to civil law.
Cliff Wachtel CPA: Long Toyota TOY: Prius top seller in Japan, strong in US best car I ever owned by far, over 50 mpg/4.2ltr per 100 klm, top power, stability
24 minutes ago
Talavera: Goodbye I am going to play with the Ouija Board.
I mean the Angel Board.
And see what it says about yrcw.
29 minutes ago
Talavera: Systemic risk out, economic risk in. The worst is not
over as dollar is damaged as the Fed goes shopping.
This news story has 4 comments:
2. The Fourth Amendment relates to people not organizations.
3. The Fourth Amendment does not apply to civil law.
Correct me if I am wrong!