Crespo and Kerr on Torres v. Madrid

A video discussion of the new case, also available in podcast form.

|

Professor Andrew Crespo and I recorded a discussion this afternoon of the Supreme Court's new ruling in Torres v. Madrid, on the meaning of Fourth Amendment "seizures."  You can watch our discussion below.  It's about 34 minutes long.  I also uploaded an audio-only podcast version here that is also available at Apple Podcasts and elsewhere.

NEXT: An E-Mail from Georgetown Law Center Dean William Treanor

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Ivy dipshits enjoying hearing themselves talk for half an hour to make a three minute point. Again with the supernatural, mind reading point, intent, lawlessly plagiarized from the Catechism. To its credit, the Church said, God could read intent, not man, as the dumbass lawyer claims. On display here is two high IQ people turned into dumbasses by law school.

    Advice: what is your new non obvious point? Say it, then shut up. Your annoying Ivy chatter makes people hate you, and stop listening.

    1. Deranged animosity like yours is why moderating these threads is more trouble than it’s worth. Consequently, what used to be a civil, informative discussion forum is now a belligerent, mostly content-free cesspool. Kudos. Well done.

      1. Hi, Leo. It is easy. Don’t read my comments. Instead of calling me names and intimidating me, try an argument of fact, of law, of logic. You lawyers are violating the Fallacy of Irrelevance when you copy the KGB Handbook you found in the trash. Do you know why you do that? 1L has destroyed your mind.

      2. Leo, what is your religion? Is it OK that the lawyer practices law plagiarized from the Catechism? Its doctrines are delusional and psychotic. I read the Sharia. I much prefer it as a model to plagiarize. All Islamic countries have a low crime rate despite poverty. It works better at peotecting the public. Is that OK?

        Current lawyering is illegal in our secular nation, and it stinks. The morons in the video are indoctrinating modern, intelligent students into ineffective garbage. It is effective at one task, rent seeking. You lawyers take our $trillion and deliver nothing of value. You destroy $2 million every year one of you breathes. The lawyer is the most toxic occupation in the country, 10 times more toxic than organized crime.

        Here. Google “elements” of mortal sin. Tell me if your state homicide law is constitutional. The word, element, is illegal in a statute. I am not bashing the Church. It is their faith. They attribute supernatural powers to God. No dispute. You evil psychotic, worthless fucks are not only in failure, you are attacking religion and plundering its assets over bullshit pretexts. The Church is 100 times more effective at teaching morality than the sick, dumb fucks in the video. You criminals stole the business model and methods of the Inquisition.

  2. This is what this blog could be.

    Thank you, Professor Kerr.

    1. This is what this blog *used to be* but in written form.

      It’s pretty dead now.

      1. I do not understand why Prof. Kerr continues (rarely) to toss his high-quality content onto the Volokh Conspiracy pile. He deserves better, as does his work.

    2. That meaningless fadt talking lawyer gibberisj is a problem. It is a form of rent seeking. Rent seeking sho UK ld be a crime with the sentencing of armed robbery.

  3. Terry stops always should have been treated as arrests.

Please to post comments