you know I only like Admiral that is I mean I do learn but I don’t remember so hello YouTube hi sorry I think that actually came up one of our cases recently oh it did one of our movies so just briefly say whatever I don’t know anything about that and then I’m going to visit it was a 4-3 decision with Sotomayor already named very angry to send video no Sotomayor wrote the opinion on eight one eight by one opinion authored by who are right I hope everyone is having a great Friday we were just getting our Supreme
Court cases together and trying to figure out it is two o’clock we are going to go live on Facebook but YouTube seems strong there’s our three conviction damn happy Friday Facebook thank you for joining us you too it has already been there as usual yeah so welcome to this literally live with brandy awesome ah I’m Brittany awesome here with each other topic is Friday August 10 and we were going to talk about the Supreme Court decision I know we were talking about it three weeks ago but we’ve had three speaking events we
have trial coming up next two weeks we’ve gotta do attorney here it has been very hectic so but we both like the blank we both get excited about googling some supreme cases from time to time yes so this is important to us and we want to share it with you regardless of how much for time we are so I will go ahead and start with a couple of national day ups and then we’ll talk about below these at home jump right into it as we have a four or five we have about five five cases to discuss in
and grants in a worker’s she’s gonna give me some facts I’m gonna try to guess what was decided I will likely be wrong because it’s not always intuitive and she will tell me everyone and we will talk about it for a minute so today is National lazy day lol nice not what happens here so we’re just going to pretend that you can celebrate natural lazy day tomorrow or Saturday yep national brownie at brunch month so you guys could eat eat brownies out brunch I mean you can keep brown to you anytime
they want but if you need a reason to eat brownies for breakfast you’ve got it [Laughter] already really bison up so you know I guess it’s like swirly pan and every brownie has an outside edge huh so you have a worm or the else like Chris Byrne and anyone who’s I know I just make them in the muffins [Laughter] national life business month there are 2.6 million black businesses in this country and just like women-owned business another minority-owned business we’d like to celebrate and encourage
people to start their own business and to thrive and to contribute to the economy so if you know of a business by taking something from your shop story service restaurant whatever it is this month and a positive reviews for them would be super helpful okay mobile news in local news we have hungry kids in Tarrant County the Arlington Animal Services once to a dog every single pet this year at the clear and the shelter’s day so go on to the X for 18 August 18 consider the shelter day so you get you
can adopt a so it’s not National Congress 900 pre-k oh oh okay bye they offer adoptions for a reducer no cross piece so that they can clear the shelters for the incoming pets it’s always 18th between 9:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. I know that every animal shelter shelter in North Texas not every I would say the majority of animal shelters in North Texas are participating in this so whatever one is near you and you have room in your home to care and letter for whatever pet because I know and what work they have pigs they have
guinea pigs so regular things guinea pigs hamsters buttons go sometimes you saw horses come around please only take things animals if you can afford them and have the time to carry out the case you know we don’t want them happier time to the shelter yeah so but the fee will be waived on August I know in Arlington Highlands and the Pet Smart which is right at the street different wave immediate option fees for the cats cats or cat seen homes they will say you can’t take this into a if you want to love a cat on the end in
imminent doors back-to-school tax free weekend so if you know okay so the first case we have is Collins versus Virginia in this case on two different occasions in Virginia a town in Virginia the police officers saw a motorcycle violating traffic rules so he did some investigation he looked around he found the house of the suspected driver and he went to the house he saw that the motorcycle was covered in the tarp on the driveway so he let me just walk on to the what’s called the curtilage of the house
and just just look and see if it’s the motorcycle he learned it’s the motorcycle in fact it was stolen so um he thought when he did it wait for the guy come back thank you back and he let him know hey so I found a motorcycle what’s up he said yeah I know it’s Solon and I bought it from somebody who it was so I knew it was stolen but I bought it from somebody else so the officer arrested him for receipt of stolen property now the issue was whether the if it was an illegal warrantless search
and seizure by him lifting the tarp covering the motorcycle parked in the drive okay so they were so by him going on to the property with no emergent need for anything I’m gonna say it was a warrantless search that being said the guy admitted of course it’s altering the poisonous tree but the guy did admit that he received stolen property from someone and knew it was stolen even though he purchased it if you know know something is stolen you are still responsible do not take stolen property I don’t care
if you are you have some idea that it might be stolen you could still be responsible okay so I think that he I’m gonna go with was a warrantless search and you should not going to probably yes because the property so the Judge Sotomayor right the on this one and that’s what the the court said that this was the curtilage of the houses protected and he has reasonable expectation of privacy assume the officer shouldn’t have gone now you know there could be thought based on the information he gathered
probably could you you know gotten worn and gone to the property and then look at the park probably so if he would have not gone over the property and just he could he looked and saw that the motorcycle was likely there covered in a Turk if he would have said you know what let me just talk to the homeowner what the homeowner gets home and home would have said all the things he said that’s admitting to a police officer Ian wrongdoing one mind you not to speak simply so others if you may or may not
be in trouble a question for something you may or may not have done call an attorney cleaning of them are available we can always call us but you could call any attorney and don’t say if you called me I probably wouldn’t know anything but I’d prefer you to Jennifer in our office all right so the next one is carpenter versus United States so in April of 2011 police arrested four men in connection with armed robberies okay one of the four guys confessed to the crimes engaged FBI self whole numbers for the
other counter participants so the FBI used this information and asked the magistrate judge for an order to do what’s called transactional to get agent transactional records for each of the phone numbers which the judge granted under stored Communications Act so the Act provides specific and Artu facts show that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the content of a wire or electronic communication or the records or other information shot saw are relevant and material to an ongoing investigation so they took these records
and what they did was they found out the location of Hall was made from and they found the cell towers and at the time the call was made from and on this particular day and based on that they they charged the guy with the others with offenses of aiding and abetting of robbery so the question was did this does this mean one less search and seizure of cell phone records which include the location and movements of cell phone users violate the fourth because the fourth partner gave the information about these people and these
phone numbers being used in the commission of a crime more curiously there they were Church with aiding and abetting and not the actual robbery itself so anyway so the court well the court said that it was retrieving these records and the use of it or underneath it was an unreasonable search and seizure and they didn’t get the proper documentation I guess it didn’t so I don’t know a lot but I guess it didn’t – whatever order that they got from the magistrate judge didn’t comply with the
the Fourth Amendment search and it was under the stored Communications Act they were probably on asking for text messages and phone calls and not location yeah you have to put that together that’s the question yes you have to completely you have to document everything you want where it’s not included and people have reasonable expectations of their privacy particularly of their soul phone records and where you know the location you are at at the time and the GPS trying to let locations but you can get that through a
warrant if you’re bored so this is alright so the next one you would like to make masterpiece tape shop versus Colorado Civil Rights Commission oh so a same-sex couple went to masterpiece cake shop in Lakewood Colorado and requested that its owner Jack Phillips design and create a cake for the wedding for the same-sex couple and Phillips said well no I take great pride in my work and I create cakes and I show my form of art as to honor God and not necessarily so it would be displeased his God so he
wouldn’t be able to make the cake so the couple filed charges of discrimination with the Colorado Civil Rights Division and this went up to the Supreme Court with a question of whether the Commission came down and said no you have to make this cake for this couple basically so the guy appeal came to Supreme Court and it’s that does the application and Colorado’s public accommodations law compelled the cake maker to design the and makes the cake violate his religious beliefs about same-sex marriage and violate his free
speech and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment well freedom of speech is not I think that as a private citizen he can make whatever decision he wants to make on what he’s selling does it rise to discrimination it is discrimination because he sings very specifically I am NOT making this because this person is is required under the First Amendment to do it anyway and you’re right that’s what supports that he’s entitled of his First Amendment freedom of speech and he is entitled in his religious beliefs
which is in the First Amendment and that allows him to not bake a cake for religious purposes so with that that goes to everyone everyone has been entitled to their beliefs without being forced to do something so if they could go find a heterosexual I guess a wedding planner who would do a heterosexual wedding or the other way around the court you know Sydney University and they respect you that you are so a same-sex couple to another cake shop yes also [Music] Jax these Phillips is the name of the
guy who owns the massive piece cake shop okay okay you’re gonna like this one did you like technology so United States versus Microsoft Microsoft has operated if they have email and as such this form of happiness so they store a whole bunch of their data overseas and they have their data all over the world right okay so Microsoft was served with a search and seizure warrant or data that was for a particular user I guess United States wanted that information for whatever reason and the data center for this particular
information is in Dublin Ireland so the provided all of the requested information and the warrant but they also provided the ask to quash the warrant on the basis that the user data is stored in Dublin and the amount of magistrate judge denied the Microsoft a motion to quash on the stored Communications Act and authorized the district court that issued a warrant for this information that will receive and saved in service uber C so they appealed and the appellate court affirmed in reviewing a de novo at the end of the
day the question came down of whether an email provider who has been served warm is he required to provide federal government with emails even if they are stored outside of the United States so how far is the reach they work toward store yeah the warrant under the stored Communications Act and the result of this you will laugh but I’ll let you guess okay so my question is the person so this is the information on a person or business person that lives here in the United States but the information
the data storage is in Dublin Ireland well knowing the end user had so the person that we’re trying to get better from had no control over where the informational story and Microsoft made the decision to store the information that I’m in guesting on just based on some algorithm not related to the location of the person so by how many this but in my opinion I think that if the person is a u.s. resident or business or provides itself or subjects itself to the jurisdiction of the United States in some way and has no control
over the information storage then there is no other place for us to the records like you need to go to Ireland to get a warrant for this information Microsoft has said you know we don’t need we don’t come how to comply with this because it’s the thing is the warrant is to cover a person or to cover an investigation based on a person you can’t go to Ireland and subpoena records from a person that’s completely not subjected itself to the jurisdiction of Ireland so there has to be some where
you get set more information just goes he can be rerouted and sent anywhere and unable to be subpoenaed and so I said the US would not appreciate that there is some way to get that information okay so support says we’re not going to prolong this so in the meantime all those cases contain that the Congress and the president signs in law clarifying the lawful over overseas use of data act which basically allows you to get possession custody and control of emails even stored outside of the United
States so the point by the time it made it to oral arguments was mood so so as long as the person is somewhat under the jurisdiction of the US there has to be I mean that makes sense yeah I am I’m gonna have to well yeah I guess the legislature fixed the problem they realized there was a problem and they fix it and anyway where the courts got to it and that’s gonna happen a lot in technology because as technology advances problems that we anticipate will come up like who knew this story in
Ireland there’s no way to get it in Ireland you know based on what Microsoft was saying so yeah so the next one everybody knows this one Trump versus Hawaii the well everybody knows what happened when President signed executive order which suspended entry for 90 days from for foreign officials or nationals from seven different Islamic countries right there I remember that what was the ultimate question and the the question was whether the the president has authority to do this can-can he does the president have
authority under the statute to issue a proclamation like this when the Congress is already taking care of this by providing security measures for because the question the issue was president was saying well we have to protect our borders from any any terrorists coming into our country via seven country and so and and the Congress that already put in appropriate security measures in place according to the defendants attorneys or I guess the plaintiff’s attorney bringing the lawsuit against Trump right
and so he’s an idiot man listen to the oral argument this one and his whole argument was that the Congress already took care of this why did the president have to sign a proclamation you know putting these seven countries but was it was the ultimate question can the present issue of proclamation or was it with these specific seven countries in this specific performance both of those can the president issue a proclamation for these seven countries and limited just at these seven countries was
Congress limited it to doing you know checks and balances on the individuals document to the country’s image but not the seven it was generally all of the countries that are on the terrorist list or the u.s. lists of the claim I don’t know why Congress didn’t want to do that oh I don’t know we just picked up the seven and so the argument was that you know does he have authority to do this though how he knows but is this so technically what so Congress put checks and balances in place that was the
argument he’s checking about Isis did not go any further than what was already in place no they did go farther than what the President had in place because he within the 90-day requirement where he said that no foreign officials from these seven countries can then come back within 90 days of the you know leaving the country so that’s the extra stuff than the president there yeah there’s some extra stuff that the president added over over this stuff that Congress already done and most president in his
inherent powers have the power to do a proclamation yeah that’s what the court said I mean he is supposed to protect and he has over Foreign Affairs and that’s his inherit right and it’s explicitly his I mean the Congress you know Congress also has the float over the foreign laws but because there are checks and balances and one of the checks and balances is the GU they’re three branches the executive legislative and the court system yeah yes yes so if the president put something in place that proper check
is to bring it before the court in the court will review and decide whether that was a proper display of authority so sleek and the issue that you hear a lot is that whoa the Supreme Court is decidedly one-sided at the moment maggiore because its majority and the president gets to appoint people the sitting president gets to appoint people when they decide to retire there by bolstering the one same argument I guess yeah so is that an issue yes it is should there be some sort of there so it’s to review them and decide if you’re
fit right so the requirement of fit is not quite as strict as one might anticipate it’s not like a list of people and Congress needs to choose the best person the Congress Congress legislative branch just gets to say this person is fit under the guidelines that we have to serve a Supreme Court justice for the remainder of his or her life and they can question him they get to a panel and asking questions or her yes they can do a panel and ask him or her questions and and decide if they’re fit naked asking
questions on or her questions on past cases that they’ve dealt and the site that they’ve dealt and the what everything represented so if you have a president that it’s decidedly one-sided and commerce is societally one-sided therefore makes a Supreme Court this is utterly one-sided thing you run the risk of minimizing the beliefs and stances of the other side which then creates civil unrest and because people feel like their voices aren’t heard so that’s kind of the situation that you’re seeing a
lot of it how we got to this point is there probably it shouldn’t there be something a little stricter on the fit qualification I would say so do I think one person should just be nominated and that’s the person that everybody should get behind I mean we cannot put aside what they’re right because in any final category for a bigger job 3 to 5 people are quick affordable and the board bets each one of the sides which is the best candidate I think personally I think that’s probably a better idea but this
is what we have this is what it’s currently in place and this is what we’re working with the moment so you can remove someone yeah it is difficult it’s like teaching president but it is an interesting place that without nurses so and these are industry moments in every year of the semi-rural soon after the Supreme Court that that do affect our lives in one way or no specifically there’s a couple of good ones regarding warrants for your information and your property and but breaching your property
line by police officers oh I was just going to add a couple of disclaimers some of the issues there there were multiple issues in all of these cases that the Court addresses and they’re they’re all fancy legalese terms for that I didn’t go too much into it I picked the easiest topic and something that all of us can wrap our heads around that would affect that would help us and then I put it in much much simpler terms there’s many more complicated facts and involved in all of these cases and we
didn’t touch base on that I got most of my information you know through just research and doing research for oh yes and whatnot so you can go to the Supreme Court you go to their website and you can pull the opinions and you the majority opinion one justice rights the majority opinion and then whomever what is in disagreement they ready to Sydney opinion or not it’s up to them sometimes you get very colorful language it can be interesting but it is kind of handy on legal terminology but it is
interesting to read if you want to find cool opinions with the full information and all the questions and all the things in all day long and one more thing we talked about other states being involved Virginia and you’re like okay we’re in Texas that’s right we are in Texas but the United States Supreme Court Trump’s anything that happens in Texas Supreme Court so if the federal government says this is the way it’s going to be this is how it’s going to be the one option Texas has to say no
generally will require Texas to forfeit some federal funding of some or protection of some kind but just assume that if the ruling is that’s the ruling that we sections despite living in Texas and whatever not the stick with the original case appeared that’s that’s cool and we have to live by it same as when the same-sex marriage was legal and the Supreme Court said it’s legally all and when you have to live by regular private citizens being able to decide who they service who they don’t that’s
why I say sometimes I have to take out certain clients and I will tell that information and as long as it doesn’t violate my ethical requirements to the state of Texas then I can do that and I appreciate that freedom so all right so if you have any questions put it in the comments otherwise happy Friday thank you for watching we’ll see you next week and I’m Brittany Austin each of its health happy Friday you tube Margareta where is the step button how do you know that
This transcript was auto-populated.