Appeals Court Rules That Cops Can Physically Make You Unlock Your Phone​

The 9th Circuit determined that forcibly mashing a suspect's thumb into his phone to unlock it was akin to fingerprinting him at the police station.​

As we keep more and more personal data on our phones, iPhone and Android devices now have some of the most advanced encryption technology in existence to keep that information safe from prying eyes. The easiest way around that, of course, is for someone to gain access to your phone.

This week, a federal court decided that police officers can make you unlock your phone, even by physically forcing you to press your thumb against it.

In November 2021, Jeremy Payne was pulled over by two California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers over his car's window tinting. When asked, Payne admitted that he was on parole, which the officers confirmed. After finding Payne's cellphone in the car, officers unlocked it by forcibly pressing his thumb against it as he sat handcuffed. (The officers claimed in their arrest report that Payne "reluctantly unlocked the cell phone" when asked, which Payne disputed; the government later accepted in court "that defendant's thumbprint was compelled.")

The officers searched through Payne's camera roll and found a video taken the same day, which appeared to show "several bags of blue pills (suspected to be fentanyl)." After checking the phone's map and finding what they suspected to be a home address, the officers drove there and used Payne's keys to enter and search the residence. Inside, they found and seized more than 800 pills.

Payne was indicted for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine.

In a motion to suppress, Payne's attorneys argued that by forcing him to unlock his phone, the officers "compelled a testimonial communication," violating both the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure and the Fifth Amendment's guarantee against self-incrimination. Even though the provisions of his parole required him to surrender any electronic devices and passcodes, "failure to comply could result in 'arrest pending further investigation' or confiscation of the device pending investigation," not the use of force to make him open the phone.

The district court denied the motion to suppress, and Payne pleaded guilty. In November 2022, he was sentenced to 12 years in prison. Notably, Payne had only served three years for the crime for which he was on parole—assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer.

Payne appealed the denial of the motion to suppress. This week, in an opinion authored by Judge Richard Tallman, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled against Payne.

Searches "incident to arrest" are an accepted part of Fourth Amendment precedent. Further, Tallman wrote that as a parolee, Payne has "a significantly diminished expectation of privacy," and even though the conditions of his parole did not require him to "provide a biometric identifier," the distinction was insufficient to support throwing out the search altogether.

But Tallman went a step further in the Fifth Amendment analysis: "We hold that the compelled use of Payne's thumb to unlock his phone (which he had already identified
for the officers) required no cognitive exertion, placing it firmly in the same category as a blood draw or fingerprint taken at booking," he wrote. "The act itself merely provided CHP with access to a source of potential information."

From a practical standpoint, this is chilling. First of all, the Supreme Court ruled in 2016that police needed a warrant before drawing a suspect's blood.

And one can argue that fingerprinting a suspect as they're arrested is part and parcel with establishing their identity. Nearly half of U.S. states require people to identify themselves to police if asked.

But forcibly gaining access to someone's phone provides more than just their identity—it's a window into their entire lives. Even cursory access to someone's phone can turn up travel history, banking information, and call and text logs—a treasure trove of potentially incriminating information, all of which would otherwise require a warrant.

When they drafted the Fourth Amendment, the Founders drew on the history of "writs of assistance," general warrants used by British authorities in the American colonies that allowed government agents to enter homes at will and look for anything disallowed. As a result, the Fourth Amendment requires search warrants based on probable cause and signed by a judge.

Tallman does note the peculiar circumstances of the case: "Our opinion should not be read to extend to all instances where a biometric is used to unlock an electronic device." But, he adds, "the outcome…may have been different had [the officer] required Payne to independently select the finger that he placed on the phone" instead of forcibly mashing Payne's thumb into it himself.

We know the premise is spot on, but anyone care to fact check or just know he's being matter of fact? Regardless, the crap American's consume is truly deplorable.

Login to view embedded media

SIAP but I didn't see this one yet. Clearly coordinated attacks (that's what they are) across the country today. This is dangerous, selfish and beyond ridiculous at this point. Some people were stuck in traffic for 4-5 hours. Who wants to bet the "protesters" get off with little more than slaps on the wrists?
Login to view embedded media

A handful of House Republicans are threatening to oust the Republican speaker for the second time in barely six months — and a growing number of their colleagues are sick of the endless intraparty standoffs.



They want Johnson to take forceful action to make the House work again. They want to raise the threshold for triggering a vote to oust the speaker, known as a motion to vacate. And some of them want to kick three of their colleagues off the powerful House Rules Committee.

Follow Election 2024

• “There has to be repercussions for situations like this,” Rep. Anthony D’Esposito (R-N.Y.) told us.

But the speaker ruled out changing the motion to vacate on Thursday — and it’s unclear whether he’ll try to make other changes as the House stumbles toward an expected vote tomorrow on a package to send $95 billion in military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan and humanitarian funding for Gaza that’s bitterly divided the party.

Raising the threshold​

When eight Republicans pitched the House into chaos in October by voting to oust House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), some in their party started discussing changing the chamber’s rules to ensure a single lawmaker couldn’t trigger such a vote again.



But a rules change never happened. Greene’s effort to depose Johnson led some Republicans to try again.
There was universal support for raising the number of lawmakers needed to sign onto a motion to vacate among members of the Republican Main Street Caucus when they met with Johnson on Wednesday, according to Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), the group’s chairman.

• “The motion to vacate set at one has been an incredibly destabilizing force for the House and for the country,” he said. “And it just doesn’t have to be this way.”

The Ukraine aid bill seemed to offer a rare chance for Republicans to change the motion to vacate because Democrats are expected to vote for the “rule” that governs debate over the bill — something members of the opposition party traditionally almost never do.
But the speaker ruled out changing the motion to vacate less than 24 hours later even though he acknowledged it had “harmed” the Republican majority.

• “Recently, many members have encouraged me to endorse a new rule to raise this threshold,” Johnson wrote on X. “While I understand the importance of that idea, any rule change requires a majority of the full House, which we do not have.”

The statement seems to imply not enough Democrats are willing to support the change, perhaps because they’re holding out for broader rules changes. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called in October for changing the rules so they “reflect the inescapable reality that Republicans are reliant on Democratic support to do the basic work of governing” — a much bigger change than what Republicans want.

The rules committee push​

Some House Republicans are also pressing Johnson to kick Reps. Chip Roy (R-Tex.), Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) off the Rules Committee, where the three of them wield an effective veto over the House agenda. They can block any rules — which govern debate over bills that come to the floor --- if the three of them vote with the committee’s four Democrats.



McCarthy put the three lawmakers on the committee last year after Roy, Norman and other lawmakers refused to vote for McCarthy for speaker unless he agreed to concessions. Roy and Norman are members of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus, while Massie is an ally of the group.
All three of them voted against the rule for the Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan package late last night.
“When you’re a member the Rules Committee, it is a position where you’re carrying out the will of the conference,” D’Esposito, a freshman who represents a district that Biden won by nearly 15 points, told us. “And they're not. They're carrying out the will of themselves. And I think if that's the situation, then perhaps there needs to be new people on the Rules Committee.”

Rep. Michael Lawler (R-N.Y.) said he thought the overwhelming majority of House Republicans wanted Roy, Norman and Massie off the committee. Any deals that McCarthy struck to become speaker are no longer in force, he added.

• “If they are unable to fulfill their job on that committee, they should resign,” he said. “And if they don’t resign, they should be removed.”

Many Main Street Caucus members — though not all of them — feel the same way, Dusty Johnson said. There’s also a renewed appetite for other structural changes that might allow the House to function better.

• “There’s a growing chorus of members who just feel like the status quo is absolutely untenable,” Johnson said.

Massie’s view​

Massie — the only Republican who’s said publicly he’ll support Greene’s motion to vacate Speaker Johnson if Greene calls it up — said he’s not bothered by the prospect of being kicked off the Rules Committee.

• “They’d be doing me a favor,” he quipped. “It’s like jury duty.”

He was more upset by the prospect of changing the motion to vacate, which he described as a cynical attempt by Johnson to hold onto the speakership akin to “something Vladimir Putin would do.”

• “It's a brazen, bold attempt to hold onto a power for the sake of having power,” Massie said. “He's not doing it for the good of our conference, or for the good of the country.”

Link for live feed:
Login to view embedded media

One name from Drake's announcement this afternoon caught my eye: Josh Sash of Oskaloosa. It is indeed Tyler's brother. Josh was most recently head coach of Indian Hills CC, led them to a 29-6 record and the NJCAA semifinals where they lost to #1 Barton last year.

Login to view embedded media

What are you watching for and/or hoping to see in Iowa’s open spring practice on Saturday?

President Biden has declared himself to be a Zionist — the first president, I believe, to express his support in this way for a permanent homeland for the Jewish people. His unwavering backing at the beginning of the Israel-Gaza war endeared him to the Israeli people. But, as a true friend of Israel, Biden knows that the Israel-U.S. relationship largely depends on democratic, shared values. Accordingly, he became increasingly critical as civilian casualties mounted and Israel failed to deliver sufficient humanitarian relief and protection for aid workers.




Israel cannot endure as a pariah on the world stage. Its long-term interests require it to prevent mass starvation in Gaza and minimize further civilian casualties. In the aftermath of the World Central Kitchen deaths, Biden’s implicit threat to withdraw support if Israel did not adjust its conduct paid dividends. Israel increased aid delivery and instituted deconfliction procedures.
These steps, in the long run, benefit Israel. Middle East veteran negotiator Dennis Ross explained on X: “Israel must be serious about permitting humanitarian assistance and ensuring the security of delivery. This is not just morally right; it is in Israel’s strategic interest to gain the time needed to dismantle Hamas militarily.”
When Iran launched hundreds of missiles and drones at Israel in an unprecedented onslaught, Biden maintained his solid support for Israel. The United States (plus Jordan and Saudi Arabia, in a head-snapping display of Israel’s support within the Sunni Arab states) provided military and intelligence assistance. Biden then followed up with a show of unwavering support from the Group of Seven.



But once again, Biden’s job as commander in chief and steward of the Israel-U.S. relationship does not include unconditionally cheerleading for the Israeli prime minister infamous for pursuing rash measures to satisfy his extremist coalition partners. Biden, therefore, mixed praise for Israel’s defensive success with a reminder of the dangers of a regional war. The Times of Israel reported that Biden “made clear publicly and privately in his call with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he does not want to see a regional conflict.” White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said Biden was “certainly not looking for a war with Iran” and that he himself was “confident that Prime Minister Netanyahu is aware of the president’s concerns.”
Contrary to some right-wing commentators’ complaints, Biden has not asked Israel to do nothing. He is urging Israel to select a response that does not set off a larger conflagration. The difference between knocking down Tehran’s power grid for a day and pummeling the city with missiles, for example, may be the difference between Israel gaining points with the international community and Israel starting a regional war.


Foreign policy expert Aaron David Miller puts it this way on X: “Israel scored a huge tactical security/political success in defending against Iranian missiles and partnering [with] US and Sunnis. [The] question now is how to turn that into a strategic opportunity [without] courting regional war. No Israeli government can accept Iran’s strike as new normal.”



Just as Biden’s warning seems to have prevented a civilian tragedy in Rafah, his latest admonition to calibrate Israel’s response appears to be working. “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has asked the Israel Defense Forces to provide a target list, according to an official familiar with high-level discussions, who said Israel is mulling retaliation that would ‘send a message’ but not cause casualties,” The Post reported.
Shortsighted defenders of Israel bristle at any sign that Biden is urging Netanyahu to show restraint. That’s foolish and contrary to the interests of the Israeli people who are demanding that Netanyahu prioritize the hostages’ release. Vicious anti-Israel critics who mouth Hamas’s chants (e.g., “From the river to the sea!”) and glorify violence want Biden to abandon our historical ally. Biden will take neither approach. Rather, his delicate intervention helps Israel maximize its own security without alienating critical Western allies.
Less informed critics accuse Biden of inconsistency. They have it backward. He remains a true friend of Israel, the sort of friend who cautions against rash action that would boomerang; who demands that Israel look beyond the moment to its long-term survival; and who, in his bones, understands the Israeli people want both democracy and security.



Both countries should be grateful that a seasoned president is in the Oval Office.

SIAP.



Is this real? It says it’s 4/16

Drugs Drugs Drugs by Tonetta is an absolute classic. Tonetta in general is amazing.

Login to view embedded media

.

The health supplements industry is huge. Googling, I see numbers from $40 billion to $80 billion in the US, and double that world-wide.

As I understand it, there is no federal program to test the safety, quality or effectiveness of supplements. Should there be?

There are a couple of independent companies that test some supplements and you can, for example, look for the USP label on your supplement bottles.

I'm looking at some bottles that I have. A couple say "USP" while others say "Lab Tested" and "GMP" (Good Manufacturing Practices) and so on. In theory, GMP means the manufacturing facility meets FDA regulations, but doesn't mean the product is good. So it's nice to see, but is only part of the picture. And, of course, anyone can stamp those things on their labels. If it's a big brand, they probably aren't lying, because they have to much to risk. Then again if there are no laws or regulations, is there really and risk? And if you've never heard of the supplier, who knows?

So, anyway, would you favor authorizing and funding the FDA or another government agency to test and verify that supplements actually have what they say, and are free from adulterants?

Deplorable:

Republican lawmakers plan to use the state’s budget surplus and Taxpayer Relief Fund to further cut Iowans’ income taxes by an estimated $1 billion next year.



The legislation makes other changes, including tweaking last year's property tax overhaul that limits revenue growth for cities and counties. It also allows county supervisors to decide whether to keep or disband county compensation boards, which review the salaries for elected county officials and recommend increases.




The proposals, which advanced out committee Thursday in both the House and Senate, would accelerate previously planned state income tax reductions passed in 2022 that started to take effect this year. As is, the law would gradually reduce personal income taxes to a flat 3.9 percent in 2026.




The bill, House Study Bill 752 and Senate Study Bill 3207, would instead lower the rate to 3.8 percent in 2025.


Iowa’s top income tax bracket this year is 5.7 percent, and it would be 4.82 percent next year if it is not accelerated by a new law.

committee, speaks with reporters Thursday, April 18, 2024, at the Statehouse in Des Moines. Republican lawmakers plan to use the state’s budget surplus and Taxpayer Relief Fund to further cut Iowans’ income taxes by an estimated $1 billion next year. (Tom Barton/The Gazette)
"We are accelerating the promised tax cuts, taking it lower and returning an extra billion dollars back to Iowans," said Sen. Dan Dawson, R-Council Bluffs, who chairs the Senate Ways and Means Committee that oversees tax policy.


Iowa’s tax revenues have largely stayed robust as the tax cuts have taken effect, leading Iowa Republicans to call for deeper tax cuts, arguing that the state is collecting more money than it needs.





Iowa ended the year with a $1.83 billion surplus, $902 million in reserve funds and $2.7 billion in the Taxpayer Relief Fund, where unspent taxes from previous years have been deposited.

What do Iowa groups say about the bill?​

Lobbyists for developers, banks and business groups praised the proposal.


“We appreciate all the progress that has been made over the last several years in making our tax climate more competitive for both individuals and businesses,” Brad Hartkopt, a lobbyist for the Iowa Association of Business and Industry, told senators during a subcommittee hearing. “We believe this bill takes us in another step going in that direction, and we support it.”


Opponents argue the savings come at the expense of underfunded public schools and health care, water quality, roads, bridges and other services across the state.


House and Senate Democratic leaders have said further income tax cuts would disproportionately benefit the wealthy, who receive the largest windfall from the falling tax brackets, and give no financial relief for the thousands of Iowans who pay no income taxes.


“This bill compounds a patently unfair tax system that we have. It takes us away from a tax system based on an ability to pay,” said Mike Owen, deputy director of progressive advocacy group Common Good Iowa. “… I would add this is one more case of taxes directing budget choices rather than the other way around, where we could determine our needs, transparently set priorities, find the best way to fund them.”


Owen argued lawmakers “could have done so much better,” focusing instead on targeted tax cuts for working families, such as strengthening the earned income tax credit and creating a child tax credit.


Opponents worry the eventual consequences will be cuts to services that make Iowa a good place to live, work and raise a family, including funding for schools, health care, public safety, child care and environmental protection.


The nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency estimates previously approved tax cuts will cost $1.9 billion a year by fiscal year 2028.


“We continually deny that we have any unmet needs today that we can push out the inevitable budget problems, for years” Anne Discher, executive director of Common Good Iowa, told lawmakers. “But just because the damage isn’t immediate doesn’t mean it’s not real. Inevitably, eventually, revenues will” drop and surpluses will dry up.

What if state revenue drops?​

If state revenues drop below state spending during a fiscal year, the bill would take half of the difference from the state's Taxpayer Relief Fund to cover the costs. The other half would come from the state's ending balance.


The state’s Taxpayer Relief Fund is expected to rise to about $3.6 billion in July, when the fiscal year ends. House Republicans say an analysis by the non-partisan Legislative Services Agency expects the fund to be at $2.6 billion in 2029, once that part of the bill expires, before rising to $2.7 billion the following year.


House Republicans say the LSA analysis anticipates a state budget surplus of $536.8 million in 2029.


Dawson said the bill provides "a good cushion" if revenues fail to meet expectations.


"If the economy outperforms, we won’t have to use any of it," he told reporters.


Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee and a Republican from Wilton, indicated that the Taxpayer Relief Fund will have more than $2 billion left in it after next year’s withdrawal.


“We’re showing here in Iowa that we’re fiscally responsible,” he told reporters. “We’re understanding concerns or mistakes made in other states. We’re still able to actualize growth, fund our priorities and still have healthy balances in the ending balance.”


House and Senate Republicans have proposed eventually eliminating the individual income tax altogether.


GOP lawmakers also have advanced measures that would make it more difficult for the Legislature to raise taxes in the future and would enshrine a flat individual income tax rate, rather than a graduated income tax system, under the Iowa Constitution — if the state imposes an income tax at all.

Two tips: 1) Don't watch at work or 2) be drinking anything...

Login to view embedded media

Just kidding.

Login to view embedded media

LOL.

Tells Merica about that nut job RFK Jr.

Sorry, Repubbers, this isn't going to end like you hoped it would.

People have been penciling in next year's freshman as possible starters for Iowa women's basketball. I doubted that Bluder would start freshman for game one unless they were of Clark, Doyle, or Logic quality. Here is my attempt to look at the 13 years of starters. I gave credit for years in the program even if they redshirted. While there may be errors, it is pretty close. It shows 11 freshman starters in 13 years. There were more frosh starters than I expected, but I didn't figure out the few that started game 1 of their Hawkeye career.

I still think it unlikely that a freshman starts game 1 next fall but maybe by the start of conference play.

Here are my starters on Day 1:
Olsen
Taylor
Feuerback
Affolter
Stuelke

Conference starters
Olsen
Taylor or Feuerback
Affolter
Stuelke
Heiden
Login to view embedded media
edited to correct Cera's class (thanks @wneff) and add asterisks to show started first games of season.

A 13-year-old boy was arrested Friday after Cedar Rapids police responded to a “swatting” call at Harding Middle School, according to authorities.



The school’s office and the police department both received calls Friday about a possible shooting at the school, according to a police news release and a message the school sent to parents.




“The Cedar Rapids Police Department responded to our school and confirmed it was a ‘swatting call.’ Swatting calls are hoax phone calls from a person reporting a serious crime to officials, which results in an emergency response,” the message states.


The school, at 4801 Golf St. NE, went into a soft lock down while the police investigated the call, and all students and staff were safe.


After ensuring there was no active threat, police officers investigated the source of the call and arrested a 13-year-old boy, who faces charges of making false reports to law enforcement and of third-degree harassment. The name of the juvenile has not been released.

No

Luke Lachey:
Login to view embedded media

This will be one of the two play games for the 7 and 8 seed. The 7 seed will be a battle among the berries. The 8 see will be amongst the "Island fruits".

The top 6 seeds are as follows:

1. Orange
2. Banana
3. Apple
4. Grape
5. Peaches/ Plums/ Nectarines
6. Watermelon

7. Winner among- Blueberries/ strawberry/ Raspberry
8. Coconut/ Papaya/ Guava/ Mango/ Avacado

Saw this on display at the local Krogers last night. Seems pretty out there, but there were only two bottles left and there seems to be a lot of people on the interwebz looking for it....

The Trump jury thread got me thinking. Who has been called to be on Jury Duty?

I've been of legal voting age for 20+ years and have never received as much as a phone call to request my presence. A couple of guys who I work with out East have been called and had to go to the courthouse.

This will be one of the two play games for the 7 and 8 seed. The 7 seed will be a battle among the berries. The 8 see will be amongst the "Island fruits".

The top 6 seeds are as follows:

1. Orange
2. Banana
3. Apple
4. Grape
5. Peaches/ Plums/ Nectarines
6. Watermelon

7. Winner among- Blueberries/ strawberry/ Raspberry/ Cranberry/ Blackberry
8. Coconut/ Papaya/ Guava/ Mango/ Avacado