IT’S ALL GOOD.
Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
You may have heard of the trendy new practice of some local jurisdictions called “Warrantless Searches of Cell Phones”. See, what that’s all about is catching drug dealers trying to make deals and thieves trying to fence stolen goods and various criminalities that the DA’s could make better cases on if they didn’t have to have a really, really, really, really good reason to trample on your fourth amendment rights. Understand , this is information that they need quick time to protect the public, or at least to throw somebody in jail.
Information. Ah, yes. Private information. The kind stored on cell phones and……personal computers. Well, at least so far, they still have to have a warrant to search your personal computer, because that’s in your house. Not secreted within your bosom on the street….in public. What part of ‘secure in their persons’ is not understood we don’t understand, but, hey, you put yourself out there on the street.
Now comes the welfare clause. The next wave, apparently, is that you have no right to reasonably expect to leave the sanctity of your home and visit a doctor and tell him things and have him write things down and then expect those confidentialities to remain confidential. See, this is why we had to pass the bill. Do you understand what Nancy Pelosi was trying to tell us? We had to pass the bill to find out what was in it. Good God! Why didn’t we pass the bill years ago?
The new regulation, a copy of which can be found here if you have the intestinal fortitude to wade through 27 pages of excruciating bureaucratese, requires insurance companies to submit detailed health information about their patients to the HHS mother ship. And the “information collection requirements” (ICRs) set forth in this Byzantine edict will not be limited to federal programs like Medicare, or even to carriers involved in Obamacare’s insurance exchanges. As the rule matter-of-factly phrases it, ICRs will apply to “all health insurance issuers both inside and outside of the exchanges” and affect carriers “in the individual and small group markets.” The new regulation includes several alternatives for gathering and reporting your health data, but opting out is not among the choices offered.
But don’t worry. Justices Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Kennedy and clan have promised to get around to reviewing this and other fundamental constitutional violations sometime before they (the justices) expire.
Don’t worry. Be happy. It’s all good.