Breaking News Events

[Hollylane]

Couple Finally Reveals Child's Gender, Five Years After Birth

It's a boy! And he's five. Beck Laxton, 46, and partner Kieran Cooper, 44, have spent half the decade concealing the gender of their son, Sasha.

"I wanted to avoid all that stereotyping," Laxton said in an interview with the Cambridge News. "Stereotypes seem fundamentally stupid. Why would you want to slot people into boxes?"

Take a look at the most controversial parenting stories of the year.

Laxton, a UK-based web editor, and her partner, Cooper, decided to keep Sasha's sex a secret when he was still in the womb. The birth announcement stated the gender-neutral name of their child, but skipped the big reveal. Up until recently, the couple only told a few close friends and family members that Sasha was a boy and managed to keep the rest of the world in the dark. But now that he's starting school the secret's out.

For years, Becks has been referring to her child, the youngest of three, as "the infant" on her personal blog. But guarding the public from her son's gender was only part of her quest to let her kid just be a kid.

Sasha dresses in clothes he likes -- be it a hand-me-downs from his sister or his brother. The big no-no's are hyper-masculine outfits like skull-print shirts and cargo pants. In one photo, sent to friends and family, Sasha's dressed in a shiny pink girl's swimsuit. "Children like sparkly things," says Beck. "And if someone thought Sasha was a girl because he was wearing a pink swimming costume, then what effect would that have? "

Sasha's also not short on dolls, though Barbie is also off limits. "She's banned because she's horrible," Laxton says in the Cambridge interview.

On a macro level she hopes her son sets an example for other parents and makes them reconsider buying their own sons trucks or forcing their daughters into tights. She's seen how those consumer trappings affect how and who kids play with in the sandbox.

See how one preschool is fighting gender bias in the classroom

But the sandbox is just a precursor to the classroom. When Sasha turned five and headed to school, Laxton was forced to make her son's sex public. That meant Sasha would have to get used to being a boy in the eyes of his peers. Still, his mom is intervening. While the school requires different uniforms for boys and girls, Sasha wears a girl's blouse with his pants.

"I don't think I'd do it if I thought it was going to make him unhappy, but at the moment he's not really bothered either way. We haven't had any difficult scenarios yet."

Last year another couple, Kathy Witterick, 38, and David Stocker, 39, of Toronto made a similar decision when they had their baby, Storm. At the time, certain psychiatric experts voiced concern over their decision. "To have a sense of self and personal identity is a critical part of normal healthy development," Dr. Eugene Beresin, director of training in child and adolescent psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, told ABC News. "This blocks that and sets the child up for bullying, scapegoating and marginalization."

But as parents well know, bullying is hard for any child to avoid. It's more important to raise someone who's confident enough in himself to overcome peer pressure. It's also important to have his parents have his back (remember the mom who defended her son's choice in a Halloween costume?) Maybe Sasha's early years will be character building, maybe he'll have a higher emotional quotient being raised with dual perspectives on gender. Or the reverse could be true: Sasha may have less of a formed identity because of his upbringing, and feel angry at his mom for dressing him in flowery shirts and telling the world about it. Then again, maybe he'll get over it.

As for Laxton, she says she's open to her son pursing any career or sexual preference he chooses as he matures. "As long as he has good relationships and good friends," she says, "then nothing else matters, does it?"

[Cin]

If information is power, then the average citizen is indeed powerless. We are spoon fed by the corporate media some version of the news giving it the slant the power elite desires for us. We are served a limited kind of reality rolled in lies and deep fried in innuendo.

Even those labeled progressive who profess to want change seem to be only capable of speaking in sound bites and catchy slogans. There is no depth, no real understanding of the issues offered for public consumption.

For example, the version of the SOPA controversy we are offered is that the bill is meant to address internet piracy but simply goes too far and may restrict the free flow of information on the web. That it borders on censorship. And while this is true, it is by no stretch of the imagination the full story. The amount of money claimed to be lost because of internet piracy is considered to be greatly exaggerated. The numbers at best are based on faulty logic and at worst are a purposeful attempt to deceive the public in an effort to convince everyone that these restrictive types of legislation are necessary. In reality the anti-piracy campaign is to a great extent about stunting the growth of legitimate online distribution because smaller companies are coming up with new and cheaper streaming alternatives. We are told the bill has been tabled and for now the internet is currently safe from this threat of censorship. But I know this is not true simply because sites I use, such as Mega Video (Megaupload) were shut down yesterday. No one talks about the bullying being done by international corporations to coerce countries around the world to adopt these so called security measures in order to censor the web globally as well as end the opportunity for cheaper but legitimate streaming alternatives.

Another example is the housing crisis. It doesn’t matter how illogical it is to believe that people who accepted mortgages over their budgets are the cause of a global economic crisis. The reality is that people do believe it. Apparently, if you have control of the media and get it to repeat something often enough no matter how ludicrous, it will become truth. The truth of what happened and continues to happen is available but the information is not easily understood so it is power we aren’t able to harness. Hedge funds, derivatives, especially credit derivatives and a particularly toxic one called credit default swaps are the means to financial armageddon. Yet the how and why of this, this extremely powerful yet available information, still eludes most of us. And without it we are powerless to ask the right questions and to make the right demands. The information and understanding that would allow us to stop this economic destruction and financial terrorism remains just out of reach. We continue to blame people for buying houses they couldn’t afford and countries like Greece for living beyond their means. And the masters of the financial universe twirl their handlebar moustaches and cackle wildly at our stupidity.

My final example of misunderstanding an issue because of a lack of enough information will lead to the reason for this post (yes, there actually is a reason.) ‘Corporations are not people' and ‘money is not speech’ sounds good and fits nicely on cardboard signs but are much too simplistic and as slogans make an issue of infinite depth seem easy to comprehend. We need to understand this issue much better than we do before we can come up with a plan to fix it that will actually do what we need it to do. Here is a rather long but in informative and marginally in depth article about what we need to understand to fix corporate control of our elections and our country.
http://www.alternet.org/news/153814/...s/?page=entire

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

If information is power, then the average citizen is indeed powerless. We are spoon fed by the corporate media some version of the news giving it the slant the power elite desires for us. We are served a limited kind of reality rolled in lies and deep fried in innuendo.

Even those labeled progressive who profess to want change seem to be only capable of speaking in sound bites and catchy slogans. There is no depth, no real understanding of the issues offered for public consumption.

For example, the version of the SOPA controversy we are offered is that the bill is meant to address internet piracy but simply goes too far and may restrict the free flow of information on the web. That it borders on censorship. And while this is true, it is by no stretch of the imagination the full story. The amount of money claimed to be lost because of internet piracy is considered to be greatly exaggerated. The numbers at best are based on faulty logic and at worst are a purposeful attempt to deceive the public in an effort to convince everyone that these restrictive types of legislation are necessary. In reality the anti-piracy campaign is to a great extent about stunting the growth of legitimate online distribution because smaller companies are coming up with new and cheaper streaming alternatives. We are told the bill has been tabled and for now the internet is currently safe from this threat of censorship. But I know this is not true simply because sites I use, such as Mega Video (Megaupload) were shut down yesterday. No one talks about the bullying being done by international corporations to coerce countries around the world to adopt these so called security measures in order to censor the web globally as well as end the opportunity for cheaper but legitimate streaming alternatives.

Another example is the housing crisis. It doesn’t matter how illogical it is to believe that people who accepted mortgages over their budgets are the cause of a global economic crisis. The reality is that people do believe it. Apparently, if you have control of the media and get it to repeat something often enough no matter how ludicrous, it will become truth. The truth of what happened and continues to happen is available but the information is not easily understood so it is power we aren’t able to harness. Hedge funds, derivatives, especially credit derivatives and a particularly toxic one called credit default swaps are the means to financial armageddon. Yet the how and why of this, this extremely powerful yet available information, still eludes most of us. And without it we are powerless to ask the right questions and to make the right demands. The information and understanding that would allow us to stop this economic destruction and financial terrorism remains just out of reach. We continue to blame people for buying houses they couldn’t afford and countries like Greece for living beyond their means. And the masters of the financial universe twirl their handlebar moustaches and cackle wildly at our stupidity.

My final example of misunderstanding an issue because of a lack of enough information will lead to the reason for this post (yes, there actually is a reason.) ‘Corporations are not people' and ‘money is not speech’ sounds good and fits nicely on cardboard signs but are much too simplistic and as slogans make an issue of infinite depth seem easy to comprehend. We need to understand this issue much better than we do before we can come up with a plan to fix it that will actually do what we need it to do. Here is a rather long but in informative and marginally in depth article about what we need to understand to fix corporate control of our elections and our country.
http://www.alternet.org/news/153814/...s/?page=entire

This speaks directly to one of the reasons I watch things like Charlie Rose & Bill Moyers. At least I feel like I am getting somewhat behind these "bites" and then can study issues further by looking up people and things talked about afterwards- on my own. Some progressive pundits are as lax as right wingers with their research and bias. I know that I have to take personal action (and the time) to weed out what is at the core of issues and is accurate.

In 2010, for example, here in CA there was a ballot initiative for medical marijuana that was just not as it was portrayed. Many left leaning voters supported it and did not take the time to research it- depended on sound bites that "sounded" more progressive in nature, but did not tell the whole story.

Being informed for me, means getting past these "bites" even if promoted by someone I usually agree with and weeding out what what is really the substance.

[LeftWriteFemme]

Catholic Bishop: Children Want to Be Sexually Abused



http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010...xually-abused/

[Hollylane]

Originally Posted by LeftWriteFemme

Catholic Bishop: Children Want to Be Sexually Abused



http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010...xually-abused/

More often than not, when I read shit like this, I don't have anything intelligent to say.

So, I'll just keep to my norm and say !(@$#$#($*@#_$!~!!!!

[Cin]

Originally Posted by LeftWriteFemme

Catholic Bishop: Children Want to Be Sexually Abused



http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010...xually-abused/

Yes, of course they do. And women want to be beaten by their husbands. That's why they piss them off.

"There are 13 year old adolescents who are under age and who are perfectly in agreement with, and what’s more wanting it, and if you are careless they will even provoke you."

If you are careless? That's what they are calling it nowadays? I wonder how careless Bishop Álvarez has been?

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by LeftWriteFemme

Catholic Bishop: Children Want to Be Sexually Abused



http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010...xually-abused/

This kind of thinking explains why pedophilia was/is so protected by the church hierarchy.

I remember an article where Pope Benedict stated that to deal with the pedophilia problem, they were screening the semanarians more closely so they could weed out the homosexuals.

Hard to fix something when you are using an inaccurate knowledge base.

[Dominique]

Paterno's medical condition worsens
Former PSU coach reported gravely ill
Sunday, January 22, 2012
By Ron Musselman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Gene J. Puskar/Associated Press
People gather Saturday night around a statue of Joe Paterno outside Beaver Stadium on the Penn State University campus.


UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Family and friends gathered around a gravely ill Joe Paterno on Saturday, keeping watch over the former Penn State University coach, the winningest in major college football history.
Mr. Paterno, 85, has "deteriorated" since being readmitted to Mount Nittany Medical Center Jan. 13 for treatment of lung cancer, a source told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Police put barricades up on McKee Street to block off the road where Mr. Paterno lives. His son Jay canceled a speaking engagement in Reading on short notice, and close friends were called to the hospital.
"Over the last few days Joe Paterno has experienced further health complications," family spokesman Dan McGinn said in a brief statement Saturday night. "His doctors have now characterized his status as serious.
"His family will have no comment on the situation and asks that their privacy be respected during this difficult time."
Mr. Paterno was diagnosed with cancer Nov. 18, just days after he was fired as head coach in the aftermath of the child sex abuse charges against former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.
Mr. Paterno also broke his pelvis in a fall at home. He initially suffered the injury in August after being blindsided in practice by wide receiver Devon Smith.
Mr. Sandusky is out on bail and awaiting trial after denying the allegations that he sexually assaulted young boys over a 15-year period. Mr. Paterno testified before a state grand jury investigating Mr. Sandusky, and authorities have said he is not a target of the probe.
But school trustees voted unanimously Nov. 9 to oust him anyway -- even though Mr. Paterno had announced that morning he would retire by the end of the season -- in part because they said Mr. Paterno failed a moral responsibility to report an allegation made in 2002 against Mr. Sandusky to authorities outside the university.

Continued on next page
1 2 Next Last


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12022...#ixzz1kBX1WA00

[Slowpurr]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

If information is power, then the average citizen is indeed powerless. We are spoon fed by the corporate media some version of the news giving it the slant the power elite desires for us. We are served a limited kind of reality rolled in lies and deep fried in innuendo.

Even those labeled progressive who profess to want change seem to be only capable of speaking in sound bites and catchy slogans. There is no depth, no real understanding of the issues offered for public consumption.

My final example of misunderstanding an issue because of a lack of enough information will lead to the reason for this post (yes, there actually is a reason.) ‘Corporations are not people' and ‘money is not speech’ sounds good and fits nicely on cardboard signs but are much too simplistic and as slogans make an issue of infinite depth seem easy to comprehend. We need to understand this issue much better than we do before we can come up with a plan to fix it that will actually do what we need it to do. Here is a rather long but in informative and marginally in depth article about what we need to understand to fix corporate control of our elections and our country.
http://www.alternet.org/news/153814/...s/?page=entire

Thank you for that rousing commentary. It spurred me to get into some reading, which led to watching, which led to...never mind, suffice to say it is time well spent. This video reviewed some of the points in your post and gives a quick background on what is fueling the movement for real government by the people. I particularly appreciated, near the end of the video, the plea to support across parties for a common cause. Any opinions on his idea of the "first 50 dollar project"? He does say in the Q&A video that a constitutional amendment is necessary but may prove difficult. Focus is on real change though. Obviously heavy monetary control over congress was alive and well before Citizens United and an amendment would not be a panacea.

I am in the process of reading about the currently ongoing development of the vision and strategy of the movement. Framing our rights as rights rather then entitlements how radical. lol I would appreciate any links to particularly enlightening articles.

Wading through the BS to find viable, unskewed information is difficult; calling for cooperative energy. I appreciate your tireless effort toward this end.
You are not just another pretty face. <w>

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Slowpurr

Thank you for that rousing commentary. It spurred me to get into some reading, which led to watching, which led to...never mind, suffice to say it is time well spent. This video reviewed some of the points in your post and gives a quick background on what is fueling the movement for real government by the people. I particularly appreciated, near the end of the video, the plea to support across parties for a common cause. Any opinions on his idea of the "first 50 dollar project"? He does say in the Q&A video that a constitutional amendment is necessary but may prove difficult. Focus is on real change though. Obviously heavy monetary control over congress was alive and well before Citizens United and an amendment would not be a panacea.

I am in the process of reading about the currently ongoing development of the vision and strategy of the movement. Framing our rights as rights rather then entitlements how radical. lol I would appreciate any links to particularly enlightening articles.

Wading through the BS to find viable, unskewed information is difficult; calling for cooperative energy. I appreciate your tireless effort toward this end.
You are not just another pretty face. <w>

I like Lawrence Lessig. Of course if you scratch his liberalism too hard you will find a conservative underneath, but that can be said about many a liberal I imagine. And at this point it isn't about whether you stand to the left or to the right, it's more about whether you want to regain control of your country. He has some good ideas and he has spoken out and worked against insane copyright infringement and anti-piracy laws, so that wins him points in my world. As for the first 50 dollar project(the Grant and Franklin Project), I find it pretty interesting. I like it. It definitely wouldn't fix everything, but it doesn't propose that it could. And I'm not sure about a constitutional amendment. I don't know what the amendment would have to say that would allow it to actually work. The supreme court's quirky interpretation of the first amendment to cover the rights of individual citizens to be able to listen (listening to what? to the corporate dollar go ca ching) makes it a pretty sticky wicket and hella confusing.

I put a couple of links to some articles explaining the project, but I'm pretty sure they won't tell you much more than you already know.

I'm not sure there is one answer or one strategy to such a complicated issue. It took a long time to completely loose any control or influence over the government so it will probably take awhile to get any back. I think it is important though to take the time to thoroughly understand the problems from all angles so as not to jump at ineffective strategies and quick fixes. Although in my opinion the fifty dollar project would be a great first step.

And you would think i have a pretty face, it looks a lot like yours.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...street/247561/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...ce-lessig.html

http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/143571...anklin-project

http://coffeepartyaustin.org/?page_id=1402

[SoNotHer]

I'd like to believe Republic Lost... is a "roadmap" or a next step. I'd like to believe that Lessig is not just one more person selling an idea, a book, a platform. I'd like to believe that one more person is not going to ultimately use to personal advantage the very dynamic, un-level playing field and hierarchy that s/he protests perhaps too much against.

And maybe the anomalous heroes are still out there. Maybe there are some who still believe that the only things worth fighting for are something other than yourself or bigger than yourself and that that sometimes doesn't ride you to some safe shore on the crest of a book deal and a lecture circuit and endless engagements. So I hope.

Let the ideas lead but not the personalities. And let us not replace one inequitable hierarchy with another. And in fact, let's look askance at all hierarchies and not just question a corrupted democracy and proffer "fixes," but lets cast a cold, discerning eye on the flawed seed in human nature that grew it.

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I like Lawrence Lessig. Of course if you scratch his liberalism too hard you will find a conservative underneath, but that can be said about many a liberal I imagine. And at this point it isn't about whether you stand to the left or to the right, it's more about whether you want to regain control of your country. He has some good ideas and he has spoken out and worked against insane copyright infringement and anti-piracy laws, so that wins him points in my world. As for the first 50 dollar project(the Grant and Franklin Project), I find it pretty interesting. I like it. It definitely wouldn't fix everything, but it doesn't propose that it could. And I'm not sure about a constitutional amendment. I don't know what the amendment would have to say that would allow it to actually work. The supreme court's quirky interpretation of the first amendment to cover the rights of individual citizens to be able to listen (listening to what? to the corporate dollar go ca ching) makes it a pretty sticky wicket and hella confusing.

I put a couple of links to some articles explaining the project, but I'm pretty sure they won't tell you much more than you already know.

I'm not sure there is one answer or one strategy to such a complicated issue. It took a long time to completely loose any control or influence over the government so it will probably take awhile to get any back. I think it is important though to take the time to thoroughly understand the problems from all angles so as not to jump at ineffective strategies and quick fixes. Although in my opinion the fifty dollar project would be a great first step.

And you would think i have a pretty face, it looks a lot like yours.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...street/247561/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...ce-lessig.html

http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/143571...anklin-project

http://coffeepartyaustin.org/?page_id=1402

[AtLast]

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefoot...2112?gt1=39002

[Cin]

Originally Posted by SoNotHer

I'd like to believe Republic Lost... is a "roadmap" or a next step. I'd like to believe that Lessig is not just one more person selling an idea, a book, a platform. I'd like to believe that one more person is not going to ultimately use to personal advantage the very dynamic, un-level playing field and hierarchy that s/he protests perhaps too much against.

And maybe the anomalous heroes are still out there. Maybe there are some who still believe that the only things worth fighting for are something other than yourself or bigger than yourself and that that sometimes doesn't ride you to some safe shore on the crest of a book deal and a lecture circuit and endless engagements. So I hope.

Let the ideas lead but not the personalities. And let us not replace one inequitable hierarchy with another. And in fact, let's look askance at all hierarchies and not just question a corrupted democracy and proffer "fixes," but lets cast a cold, discerning eye on the flawed seed in human nature that grew it.

I don't imagine Lessig is some kind of hero. I don't actually believe in heroes. Sometimes I believe in human beings or better said is that there are some human beings I believe in. But ultimately people are only human. Still I don't think that his interest only lies with selling books. He has been a political activist for many years and I like some of the things he says and I liked some stuff he wrote about the anti piracy and copyright laws. He was an advocate. But if anything taught me not to believe in personalities it was Obama.

I do like the fifty dollar project and I would no matter whose idea it was.

[SoNotHer]

I do believe in heroes because I've seen them, and I've met them, quiet as they are and quiet as they go.

And I hope the ideas lead. Ideas like the $50 project, ideas like local dollars, ideas like permacultual restoration, ideas like the talking stick. I believe in the ideas and the people who carry them forward without bravado and some times at great personal risk. Here's to that and this future we live in brought to us by ideas and the people who risked belief in them.

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I don't imagine Lessig is some kind of hero. I don't actually believe in heroes. Sometimes I believe in human beings or better said is that there are some human beings I believe in. But ultimately people are only human. Still I don't think that his interest only lies with selling books. He has been a political activist for many years and I like some of the things he says and I liked some stuff he wrote about the anti piracy and copyright laws. He was an advocate. But if anything taught me not to believe in personalities it was Obama.

I do like the fifty dollar project and I would no matter whose idea it was.

[betenoire]

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Steps Down from Congress

[Hollylane]

Originally Posted by betenoire

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Steps Down from Congress

I heard about this earlier. Thank you for posting it. It is so sad that we are losing her voice in congress because of a horrible decision made by someone else.

[LeftWriteFemme]

Parents: Gay teen took his life because of bullying


A Gordonsville boy's parents say bullying caused their son to take his own life. Phillip Parker, 14, died this week. His parents said he was constantly bullied for being gay.

More than 100 people gathered in Gordonsville on Saturday night, grieving the loss of Phillip.

"He was fun, he was energetic, he was happy," said Gena Parker, Phillip's mother.

To his many friends, Phillip was known as the boy who told everyone they're beautiful.

"He kept telling me he had a rock on his chest," said Ruby Harris, Phillip's grandmother. "He just wanted to take the rock off where he could breathe."

Phillip's family said they reported their concerns over their son's bullying to Gordonsville High School on multiple occasions, but the bullying by a group of students just got worse.

"I believe my whole family up in heaven's taking good care of him," said friend Megan Redinger.

"I want to say I love him dearly," added friend Heather Hunt. "He'll never be forgotten. He's always in my heart."

"That's my son," said Phillip Parker, Phillip's father. "I love him. I miss him. He shouldn't have had to kill himself to be brought to life."

An official with Smith County Schools told Channel 4 they are now planning how to handle a crisis situation with students Monday. Friends added they are planning to set up a memorial fund in Phillip's name but haven't made the arrangements just yet.


http://www.wsmv.com/story/16572441/p...ue-to-bullying

[MsTinkerbelly]

Gov. Christie nominates openly gay New Jersey Supreme Court justice
By Adam Bink

Well, like Steven Goldstein of Garden State Equality, you could pick me up off the floor too. His statement:

A few minutes ago, just before announcing his two new Supreme Court nominees, Governor Christie called me on my cell phone to tell me he is nominating Bruce Harris to the New Jersey Supreme Court. Bruce will become the first openly LGBT person in history, and the third African-American person in history, to serve on the New Jersey Supreme Court. Most importantly, Bruce is eminently qualified to be a Supreme Court justice.

As I told the Governor right then and there, you could have picked me up off the floor.

When I met with Governor Christie in 2010 at his request, he told me that though we would differ on some issues like marriage equality, he viewed the LGBT community as an important part of New Jersey, and that he wanted his Administration to have a good working relationship with Garden State Equality. That has been the case every step of the way. Since Governor Christie took office, his Administration has treated us with warmth and responsiveness. Yes is yes, no is no, and we’ll get back to you means they get back to you faster than you thought, usually with invaluable help. To be clear, the Governor and his staff were invaluable in helping us pass the Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights, the nation’s strongest anti-bullying law that the governor signed in January 2011.

No one’s asked me to say any of this – I am simply giving credit where credit is due, too rare in political life.

Now, as for the marriage equality bill: The Governor and I didn’t discuss that in our phone conversation. I recognize, and caution everyone, that it would be unwise to read any change here in the Governor’s position on marriage equality; he has said in past months and years that he would veto the bill, and we take him at his word. We will fight hard every minute of every day to win marriage equality in New Jersey. Nothing will deter us.

But again, right now, that doesn’t mean we should not give credit where credit is due. Today, the Governor has made civil rights history, and on behalf of all of us at Garden State Equality, I extend to him our most profound appreciation.

Worth noting that this week will begin hearings on the marriage equality legislation in New Jersey (as well as in Washington — more on that from Jacob later).

[Kobi]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that police must get a search warrant before using GPS technology to track criminal suspects.

The decision was a defeat for the government and police agencies, and it raises the possibility of serious complications for law enforcement nationwide, which increasingly relies on high tech surveillance of suspects, including the use of various types of GPS technology.

A GPS device installed by police on Washington, D.C., nightclub owner Antoine Jones' Jeep helped them link him to a suburban house used to stash money and drugs. He was sentenced to life in prison before the appeals court overturned the conviction.

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia said that the government's installation of a GPS device, and its use to monitor the vehicle's movements, constitutes a search, meaning that a warrant is required.

"By attaching the device to the Jeep" that Jones was using, "officers encroached on a protected area," Scalia wrote. He concluded that the installation of the device on the vehicle without a warrant was a trespass and therefore an illegal search.

All nine justices agreed that the GPS monitoring on the Jeep violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure, a decision the American Civil Liberties Union said was an "important victory for privacy."

Washington lawyer Andy Pincus called the decision "a landmark ruling in applying the Fourth Amendment's protections to advances in surveillance technology." Pincus has argued 22 cases before the Supreme Court and filed a brief in the current case on behalf of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a civil liberties group with expertise in law, technology, and policy.

The Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, said the court's decision is "a victory for privacy rights and for civil liberties in the digital age." He said the ruling highlights many new privacy threats posed by new technologies. Leahy has introduced legislation to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, a 1986 law that specifies standards for government monitoring of cell phone conversations and Internet communications.

Scalia wrote the main opinion of three in the case. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor.

Sotomayor also wrote one of the two concurring opinions that agreed with the outcome in the Jones case for different reasons.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote, in the other concurring opinion, that the trespass was not as important as the suspect's expectation of privacy. Police monitored the Jeep's movements over the course of four weeks after attaching the GPS device.

"The use of longer term GPS monitoring in investigations of most offenses impinges on expectations of privacy," Alito wrote in an opinion joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan. Sotomayor in her concurring opinion specifically said she agreed with Alito on this conclusion.

Alito added, "We need not identify with precision the point at which the tracking of this vehicle became a search, for the line was surely crossed before the four-week mark."

Regarding the issue of duration, Scalia wrote that "we may have to grapple" with those issues in the future, "but there is no reason for rushing forward to resolve them here."

Alito also said the court should address how expectations of privacy affect whether warrants are required for remote surveillance using electronic methods that do not require the police to install equipment, such as GPS tracking of mobile telephones. Alito noted, for example, that more than 322 million cellphones have installed equipment that allows wireless carriers to track the phone's location.

"If long-term monitoring can be accomplished without committing a technical trespass — suppose for example, that the federal government required or persuaded auto manufacturers to include a GPS tracking device in every car — the court's theory would provide no protection," Alito said.

Sotomayor agreed. "It may be necessary to reconsider the premise that an individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information voluntarily disclosed to their parties," she said.

A federal appeals court in Washington had overturned Jones's drug conspiracy conviction because police did not have a warrant when they installed a GPS device on his vehicle and then tracked his movements for a month. The Supreme Court agreed with the appeals court.

The case is U.S. v. Jones, 10-1259.

http://news.yahoo.com/high-court-war...153034235.html

[UofMfan]

Washington Gay Marriage: Legislature Has Enough Votes To Legalize Same-Sex Marriage ~ HuffPo