That was Thomas who joined Gorsuch's SFFA concurrence. Not sure if Alito would agree with Manhart

LMAO. I still remember that snarky Gorsuch response

To be fair, he was correct from a legal standpoint in that case

I'm guessing if they have fewer than 15 employees

But the police didn't have a warrant to search this guy's phone. The agent compelled him to open the phone and they used evidence to help prosecute him. Wouldn't that at least violate Riley in your view?

What does it matter if Jefferson never said it if they feel as if he had said it?

IANAL, but isn't the speech after the conduct here unlike conspiracy & solicitation? It seems similar to Stevens where the government unsuccessfully argued that videos of animal cruelty were speech integral to criminal conduct. I obviously agree that the speech is defamatory and conduct is harassing

...
I think that makes the mandatory seizure under the 4A unreasonable

I don't think I'm giving the most articulate argument, but in the NJ case, the state was forcing babies' blood to be extracted for a particular purpose of testing for genetic diseases and is keeping the blood for uses beyond the stated purpose unlike other states...

No because there's no coercion or anything being forced there

I'm curious what your opinion is on New Jersey doing mandatory blood testing of babies and later searching that to solve crimes. I think since that's forced, NJ should have to destroy the records after finding what diseases the baby has

Congrats to NYT, WaPo, LAT, CNN, etc. for still being in the running for the final rose