NEWS AND VIEWS THAT IMPACT LIMITED CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with
power to endanger the public liberty." - - - - John Adams
For months idiot GOP Gov. Larry Hogan abolished freedom and locked down his state including indoor dining, fitness centers, casinos, arcades, malls and even miniature golf.
Now in the name of COVID he is abolishing the voting booth.
Maryland is set to transition from approximately 1800 polling places to 282 voting centers for November’s election in an effort to prevent the spread of coronavirus among voters, according to a plan proposed by the state’s Board of Elections and authorized by Republican Gov. Larry Hogan.
Unlike polling places, voting centers are large, open spaces like gymnasiums or convention centers, Nikki Charlson, the deputy administrator for Maryland’s Board of Elections, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Though almost 85% of the state’s usual polling places will be closed, election officials think that voting centers’ ability to hold more in-person voters, voting absentee and voting early will ultimately prevent any voters from being disenfranchised, Charlson said.
In addition to the voting centers’ ability to better handle influxes of in-person voters, those registered are eligible to vote in any center in their home county, according to the plan.
This graphic illustrates how a StingRay works. Signals from cellphones within the device's radius are bounced to law enforcement. The information relayed may include names, phone numbers, locations, call records and even text messages.
GOP Governor Refuses
to Back Bill of Rights
The Fascist GOP Governor of Maryland, who has the entire state under Coronavirus House Arrest, has refused to sign a law protecting our 4th Amendment right to privacy.
In Maryland both parties passed the bill to protect our rights while in Washington both parties protect and fund all programs to rape our rights.
ANNAPOLIS, Md. (May 8, 2020) – Yesterday, Maryland GOP Gov. Lawrence Hogan announced he would allow a bill to ban the use of “stingrays” to track the location of phones without a warrant and prohibit police from sweeping up electronic communications to go into law without his signature.
Del. David Moon (D), along with three fellow Democrats, introduced House Bill 499 (HB499) on Jan. 24. Sen. Charles Sydnor (D-Baltimore) sponsored the companion, Senate Bill 246 (SB246). The new law helps block the use of cell-site simulators, known as “stingrays.”
These devices essentially spoof cell phone towers, tricking any device within range into connecting to the stingray instead of the tower. This allows law enforcement to sweep up communications content, as well as locate and track the person in possession of a specific phone or other electronic device.
The new law adds provisions to existing Maryland statutes limiting warrantless location tracking through electronic devices to address the use of cell-site simulators. Under the law, police will be required to get a court order based on probable cause before deploying a stingray device. The law also bars police from using a stingray to obtain communication content and spells out explicit criteria law enforcement must meet in order to justify such an order.
On Feb. 27, the House passed HB499 by a 132-4 vote. The Senate concurred with a unanimous vote of 45-0. The law will go into effect on Oct. 1, 2020.
The new law includes limitations on the use of stingrays even with a court order. These restrictions require police to restrict the investigative use of any third–party or non-target data without a further court order. The law requires the deletion of any incidentally gathered information on persons not named in the court order immediately upon the expiration of the order.
Information gathered in violation of the law will be subject to the exclusionary rule as judicially determined. Information gathered on non-targeted devices would not be admissible in court under any circumstances.
The law will not only protect privacy in Maryland, but it will also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.
The federal government funds the vast majority of state and local stingray programs, attaching one important condition. The feds require agencies acquiring the technology to sign non-disclosure agreements. This throws a giant shroud over the program, even preventing judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys from getting information about the use of stingrays in court.
The feds actually instruct prosecutors to withdraw evidence if judges or legislators press for information. As the Baltimore Sun reported in April 2015, a Baltimore detective refused to answer questions on the stand during a trial, citing a federal non-disclosure agreement.
The feds sell the technology in the name of “anti-terrorism” efforts. With non-disclosure agreements in place, most police departments refuse to release any information on the use of stingrays. But information obtained from the Tacoma Police Department revealed that it uses the technology primarily for routine criminal investigations.
Some privacy advocates argue that stingray use can never happen within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment because the technology necessarily connects to every electronic device within range, not just the one held by the target. And the information collected by these devices undoubtedly ends up in federal databases.
The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE. In other words, stingrays create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.
The federal government funds the vast majority of state and local stingray programs, attaching one important condition. The feds require agencies acquiring the technology to sign non-disclosure agreements. This throws a giant shroud over the program, even preventing judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys from getting information about the use of stingrays in court. The feds actually instruct prosecutors to withdraw evidence if judges or legislators press for information. As the Baltimore Sun reported in April 2015, a Baltimore detective refused to answer questions on the stand during a trial, citing a federal non-disclosure agreement.
So-called "Conservatives" in Congress are almost totally silent as our rights are being pissed on.
Meanwhile Fascist GOP Governors from Arizona to Texas to Florida to Maryland to Ohio have eagerly torn up the Constitution and gave the middle finger to freedom.
This authoritarianism from "Conservatives" is why I left the GOP in 2002 to become an independent Constitutional Federalist.
(Daily Signal) - Protesters with the organization Reopen Maryland say they see the frustration of fellow Marylanders as their state experiences the economic effects of the coronavirus lockdown. “We are seeing a lot as we do these rallies and protests; we’re seeing more and more people are frustrated,” Evie Harris, a co-organizer for Reopen Maryland, said Monday in an interview with The Daily Signal. Much of that frustration, Harris said, is directed at Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican in his second term heading the Democrat-dominated state. “We believe our governor is literally ignoring us,” she said, citing a “bubbling” frustration also reflected on the group’s Facebook page.
“Not only is that inexcusable for an elected official,” Harris said, “but there’s also dehumanizing because it downplays or disregards the utter devastation that these families and businesses are going through.” Reopen Maryland, which calls itself “a group of individuals concerned about the impact of Maryland’s mass shutdowns and school closures in response to COVID-19,” held a cross-state road rally Saturday to protest Hogan’s extension of the Free State’s shutdown to May 10. Residents in about 250 cars participated in the Frederick area, Harris said, and reporting indicated that another 300 persons participated on foot. Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., addressed the rally, voicing his own frustrations. “I didn’t wake up in communist China and I didn’t wake up in North Korea this morning,” Harris said in his remarks. “And tomorrow morning, I should be able to go to the church of my choice and worship the way that I choose.” Evie Harris, who is not related to the congressman, said that Reopen Maryland announced Saturday that it had joined with 17 other plaintiffs in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. “The suit basically alleges that the government’s executive orders violate our rights, they violate our civil and constitutional rights, and so we are petitioning the court to have our case heard,” she said. Over 234,000 people filed for unemployment in Maryland from March 15 through April 3, The Baltimore Sun reported. Read More . . . .
Students in Montgomery County schools in Maryland will be subject to sweeping new policies that cater to transgenders on campus, including promoting a gender-neutral dress code; options for gender, name, and pronouns; and “safe spaces.”
The six-page document issued by Montgomery County Public Schools includes everything from a list of gender “definitions” to instructions for developing plans for transgender students that could include a student’s parents “if the family is supportive of the student.” The goal of the “guidelines” is laid out in a bulleted list:
Support students so they may participate in school life consistent with their asserted gender identity;
Respect the right of students to keep their gender identity or transgender status private and confidential;
Reduce stigmatization and marginalization of transgender and gender nonconforming students;
Foster social integration and cultural inclusiveness of transgender and gender nonconforming students; and
Provide support for MCPS staff members to enable them to appropriately and consistently address matters of student gender identity and expression.
“Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) is committed to a safe, welcoming school environment where students are engaged in learning and are active participants in the school community because they feel accepted and valued,” the guidelines state. “To this end, all students should feel comfortable expressing their gender identity, including students who identify as transgender or gender nonconforming.”
The guidelines include a long list of “gender identity” definitions, including “agender” — “Without a gender (also ‘nongendered’ or ‘genderless’),” and “transgender” — “an adjective describing a person whose gender identity or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s sex assigned at birth. Other terms that can have similar meanings are ‘transsexual’ and ‘trans.’”
The definition list also includes “transition”:
The process by which a person decides to live as the gender with which the person identifies, rather than the gender assigned at birth. In order to openly express their gender identity to other people, transgender people may take a variety of steps (e.g., using a nickname or legally changing their names and/ or their sex designation on legal documents; choosing clothes and hairstyles that reflect their gender identity; and generally living, and presenting themselves to others, consistently with their gender identity). Some, but not all, transgender people take hormones or undergo surgical procedures to change their bodies to align with their gender identity.
Dress codes, sports, and “safe spaces” are also addressed in the guidelines:
DRESS CODE
Transgender and gender nonconforming students have the right to dress in a manner consistent with their gender identity or gender expression, so long as it complies with the MCPS dress code. School staff members shall not enforce a school’s dress code more strictly for transgender or gender nonconforming students than for other students.
Schools should consider gender neutral dress codes for class or yearbook photos, honor society ceremonies, graduation ceremonies, or dances. In addition, in circumstances where gendered clothing is worn (e.g., in shows and performances), students should be allowed to wear the garments associated with their gender identity.
PHYSICAL EDUCATION CLASSES AND INTRAMURAL SPORTS
3⁄4 Whenever the school provides gender-segregated physical education classes and intermural sports, students must be allowed to participate in a manner consistent with their gender identity.
Safe Zones: Schools will designate certain teachers’ classrooms, specific offices, or a location in a school that is deemed a safe zone where any student, for whatever reason, may go to be free from judgment and to feel comfortable and safe. Schools also should ensure that staff members who have safe zone stickers on their doors have received appropriate training regarding providing inclusive, affirming environments.
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the guidelines is instructing staff and students that parents may not always be involved in decisions made for transgender students, which is explained under the heading “Proactively working with transgender and gender nonconforming students”:
The principal (or designee), in collaboration with the student and the student’s family (if the family is supportive of the student), should develop a plan to ensure that the student has equal access and equal opportunity to participate in all programs and activities at school and is otherwise protected from gender-based discrimination at school.
Prior to contacting a student’s parent/guardian, the principal or identified staff member should speak with the student to ascertain the level of support the student either receives or anticipates receiving from home. In some cases, transgender and gender nonconforming students may not openly express their gender identity at home because of safety concerns or lack of acceptance. Matters of gender identity can be complex and may involve familial conflict; if this is the case, and support is required, the Office of School Support and Improvement or the Office of Student and Family Support and Engagement (OSFSE) should be contacted.
In such cases, staff will support the development of a student-led plan that works towards inclusion of the family, if possible, taking into consideration of safety concerns, as well as student privacy, and recognizing that providing support for a student, even when the family is non- supportive is critical.
The guidelines also link to an “intake form” for students, where they can choose their gender — male, female, or other — and their preferred pronoun and name if the latter differs from their official school registration where their birth name might have been used.
(Daily Mail) - A black college lacrosse player has been arrested in connection with two incidents of racist graffiti found in a dorm on the Goucher College campus in Maryland.
Fynn Ajani Arthur, a 21-year-old from Brunswick, Maine, was charged with two counts of malicious destruction of property on Thursday night in Baltimore County.
His arrest came after graffiti aimed at black and Latino students was found on the second floor of a campus dorm, one floor above where similar graffiti had been found on November 14, Goucher College administrators said in a statement.
Both incidents that shook the Towson campus involved backward swastikas and targeted specific individuals, according to the statement.
Thursday's graffiti depicted swastikas, the letters 'KKK' and appeared to include the last names of four black students, including Arthur. The previous graffiti reportedly said all 'n*****s' on campus would be killed.
Arthur was released his own recognizance after a bail review hearing on Friday, according to jail records.
He has been banned from campus pending a student conduct review.
Goucher Public Safety officials worked with Baltimore County Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Baltimore Field Office to investigate both of graffiti incidents.
Why should the Christmas season be any different from the rest of the year? We spend trillion to level cities in the Middle East and make people homeless, but we spend next to nothing to help homeless Americans.
DUNDALK, Md. (WMAR) - A Dundalk church faces a fine of $12,000 for helping the homeless.
“I showed up Wednesday morning to find a citation on the door that said we're going to be fined $12,000 and have a court date because we have unhoused homeless people sleeping outside the church at night,” said Reverend Katie Grover with the Patapsco United Methodist Church.
Grover added that the men and women who sleep outside their doors do so because they have nowhere else to go and because they feel safe there.
“We feel we here as a church that it's scriptural mandate that's it an imperative to care for the least, the last, the lost, the poor, the hungry,” she said.
While it may be the business of the church to serve the homeless, Chester Bartko, the owner of a produce stand next door, said it’s hurting his business.
“We can't be here all night patrolling the area. We can't control whether someone comes and sleeps outside of our doors, so I don't know how we're cited for people who find refuge here,” Grover said.
Grover is now struggling with doing what's right and what's legal.
“The church should live up to the community standards, not be a magnet for these people,” said Bartko.
“They are children of God just as well, they're our neighbor just as well and I just try to explain we're doing the best we can,” said Grover.
The church is scheduled to appear in court on December 21.
"At this festive season of the year, Mr Scrooge, ... it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
"Are there no prisons?"
"Plenty of prisons..."
"And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
The Cruz campaign is dead, but the corpse is still twitching a bit.
Cruz is insane to try and claim the GOP nomination when he racks up "massive" numbers like 14% in New York, 11% in Connecticut, 10% in Rhode Island or 15% in Delaware.
To win the November election the GOP nominee will have to carry states that have voted Democrat in the past, and Cruz can't even win a GOP primary in those key states.
Sorry Ted, but carrying the Bible Belt won't cut it in November. But actually Cruz even lost the evangelicals to Trump.
Cruz supporters and many talking heads on TV have trashed these northeastern states that voted this last week. They forget that in 2014 New York and these other states sent 23 Republican Congressmen to Washington. They have a major roll in GOP politics and they have rejected Cruz and Kasich in landslide numbers.
It is not 1840. Those days are gone. In this modern age a candidate who lost most of the elections cannot win the nomination.
I don't care what happens in Indiana. It's over.
Playing Taps for Ted
The Donald opened the can on open borders Ted Cruz.
(Monmouth Poll) - Donald Trump’s sizable lead in Maryland’s GOP primary puts him on
track to claim all 38 delegates available. The Monmouth University Poll finds that concerns about
Trump’s suitability for office expressed by the state’s Republican governor hold little sway with voters
there.
Currently, 47% of likely Republican primary voters in Maryland support Trump compared to
27% who support John Kasich and 19% who intend to vote for Ted Cruz.
Trump’s strongest area of
support is in congressional districts 1 and 5, the eastern part of the state bordering the Chesapeake Bay,
where he earns 54% support to 24% for Kasich and 11% for Cruz. Trump also does well in districts 6 and
8, which encompass the western part of the state, with 44% of the vote to 25% for Kasich and 23% for
Cruz.
Trump leads by a smaller margin in the state’s remaining four congressional districts that run along
the I-95 corridor from Baltimore to the DC suburbs, getting 43% of the vote there to 31% for Kasich and
20% for Cruz.
“If Trump’s current level of support translates to each of Maryland’s eight congressional districts,
he may be able to run the table in the all-important delegate contest,” said Patrick Murray, director of the
independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.
Trump holds a large advantage among very conservative voters (58% to 27% for Cruz and 9% for
Kasich), but a much smaller edge among somewhat conservative voters (38% to 33% for Kasich and 21%
for Cruz).
He splits the moderate vote with Kasich at 41% apiece, while Cruz gets 10%.
Kasich has a slight lead over Trump among college graduates (40% to 35%, with Cruz at 17%),
but Trump more than makes up for this by garnering the support of nearly 6-in-10 voters who do not have
a college degree (58%), compared to only 21% who support Cruz and 14% who support Kasich. Trump also enjoys a large lead among male voters (55% to 24% for Kasich and 13% for Cruz) that augments his
smaller lead among female voters (37% to 30% for Kasich and 25% for Cruz).
“Even though Kasich is competitive among certain demographic groups, Trump’s overwhelming
support among men without a college education accounts for his substantial lead statewide,” said Murray
This is why I hate knee-jerk party line propaganda. In this case we see Democrat run legislatures in Maryland and California standing up for your right to free Internet speech against business owners who want to silence you.
(Electronic Frontier Foundation) - Should a company be allowed to use its own contractual fine print to take away its customers’ free speech? What fundamental rights should not be waivable?
We’ve written in the past about companies putting clauses in their form contracts that ostensibly forbid customers from posting online reviews of those companies’ products and services. Members of the Maryland House of Delegates have introduced a bill (MD H.B. 131) seeking to end the practice in Maryland. The bill’s sponsors are Dels. Jeff Waldstreicher, David Moon, Benjamin Kramer, and C.T. Wilson.
Under H.B. 131, vendors would not be allowed to use “gag clauses” in their contracts with customers—for example, an auto repair shop in Maryland wouldn’t be allowed to use a contract that tries to restrict its customers from complaining online about its services. HB 131 is closely modeled after a law that California passed in 2014.
EFF submitted a written testimony to the Maryland House of Delegates Economic Matters Committee in support of this timely bill:
H.B. 131 addresses one component of a larger issue that has troubled us for years: companies hiding terms in form contracts designed to rob customers of their rights. Whether it’s a restrictive terms-of-service agreement waiving a customer’s right to modify the software on her phone or a dentist’s contract forbidding his patient from leaving a negative review, the principle is the same: contracts should not be used to waive consumers’ rights. This is especially true when consumers don’t have a meaningful opportunity to negotiate contract terms.
We’ve been following the disturbing trend of vendors burying clauses in their contracts that bar customers from leaving reviews of their products and services. When these cases have gone to trial, courts have reliably sided with the customer; unfortunately, that hasn’t stopped the practice. For every high-profile story of a customer fighting back against this unfair business practice, there are many more stories we’ll never hear: stories of customers who simply gave up under a company’s pressure to pay a fine or delete a review. Because legal gray areas are fertile ground for legal bullying, the law should make it clear that customers have every right to speak their mind, even if a company’s form contract says otherwise.
We recommended two possible improvements to the bill. We noted that the bill only applies to “goods or services that are primarily for personal, household, or family purposes”—we’re not sure why the drafters chose to limit its scope that way.
(Reason) - To me, nothing screams summer like picking and eating fresh berries. I know I'm not alone. Greg Visscher, head of the Montgomery County (Maryland) Young Republicans Club, has been picking berries with his family for years.
So it was with some degree of surprise that Visscher found himself confronted last month by a trio of county park police officers and handed a $50 ticket for "destroying/interfering with plants to wit: berries. Without a permit on park property."
The idea that the mere act of picking berries from a plant can be equated with "destroying" or "interfering with" a plant is bizarre. Picking berries (or tomatoes or apples, beans, peppers, or any other fruit or vegetable) does no harm to the flora upon which the food grows. The county's claimed need for a permit was news to Visscher—and to me. I live in Montgomery County, and just the day before Visscher was ticketed, I had picked raspberries in the county park nearest my home.
I've spoken at length with Visscher by email, both for this column and for a book I'm writing that focuses in part on food laws that prohibit sustainable food practices like picking wild berries. Visscher tells me was picking raspberries in Wheaton Regional Park, a public space near where I live in Bethesda, when an officer approached him and issued him the aforementioned $50 citation. Two more officers soon appeared. Visscher also tells me the police made reference to a need to obtain a nebulous "permit" for harvesting berries—both verbally and on the ticket itself—a permit neither Visscher nor I have been able to identify.
I spoke this week with Lt. Rick Pelicano of the park police, who had no information on Visscher's ticket or on the need for a foraging permit. Lt. Pelicano pointed me to the relevant rules, which pertain to a county prohibition on "destroy[ing] or interfer[ing] in any way with any... plants" on public property.
Tickets like the one Visscher received are rare.
"Charges under this section are infrequent," Pelicano told me by email. "Researching the last year we found three incidents that were cited related to this. Two resulted in a citation [while] one was a written warning."
How could Visscher—or I—know that the county views picking some berries without a permit as verboten?
"There is no sign anywhere saying that berries cannot be harvested," Visscher tells me. "To my knowledge, there is nothing in the park that even highlights this." I could not locate any such signage on a visit to the park on Thursday. A park staffer I spoke with could not point me to any.
