The 4th Amendment, Usury, and other subjects
Another example of how civil rights and liberties are slowly eroding in our nation is this news story which doesn’t seem to have made the light of day.
Simply put, the 9th Circuit of Appeals -one step below the SCOTUS- (and for those who aren’t sure of the hierarchy of courts, see here)
denied an en banc rehearing of the case United States v. Lemus, which dealt with a warrantless police search of a suspect’s home after he was arrested outside of it. Please read the pdf at the bottom of this link and note who was on the panel that rejected the idea of hearing the case before the full attendance of all judges -"en banc"- that sit on the 9th Circuit of Appeals. Does the name Jay Bybee ring a bell?
So ,in the absence of an appeal to the SCOTUS that overturns this opinion, your rights under the 4th Amendment have now been stepped on big time.
What is usury? It’s "The practice of lending money and charging the borrower interest, especially at an exorbitant or illegally high rate. 2. An excessive or illegally high rate of interest charged on borrowed money. 3. Archaic. Interest charged or paid on a loan.
With all the news and commentary about interest rates,banks,credit cards, and so on, I thought i might share the history behind such interest; or as it is nowadays, usury.
Note that all of the States in the Union adopted a general usury law. Most states set the interest limit at 6%. But that a move to ‘de-regulation’ in the early 1900’s led to that limit becoming defunct.
And that in 1978, the SCOTUS -them again- decided that national banks may export the state interest rate law of their home state into any state where they do business. In response, South Dakota eliminated its interest rate caps. Several credit card issuing banks moved to South Dakota and operate nationally with no interest rate cap (except for the new law that gave them 9 months to ramp up their interest rates,etc.). This was the Burger Court for those who wish to dig into the history of the SCOTUS during his term as Chief Justice. He did vote for Roe V. Wade but he also wrote a famous concurring opinion in the Court’s 1986 decision upholding a Georgia law criminalizing sodomy.
And then there is HR2278
Which leads to the need for peace. And that’s what these people are hoping to achieve.
If that link doesn’t work, try this and use the translate feature.
And for those physically young, this may be of interest.
In summation,the answer to life, universe and everything.