re: I don’t understand the Acosta ruling

Acosta refused to give a microphone, and the judge ruled that he get due process before his privilege of asking questions can be revoked.

So....

If I refused to give a breathalyzer, would the judge rule that I get due process before my privilege of driving can be revoked?

quote:

---

It was a good ruling. The WH pulled his pass without giving him a trial or investigation. Technically, all citizens are due process before the government takes action.

Don’t like the ruling but it’s correct.

---

Lol wut? All kinds of rights and freedoms can be revoked without any sort of trial or investigation? What was there to investigate, it was in plain view on camera

quote:

---

If I refused to give a breathalyzer, would the judge rule that I get due process before my privilege of driving can be revoked?

---

Well, in Texas you do, it's called an "administrative license revocation" hearing. It requires preponderance of evidence and is heavily, heavily slanted against the defendant (but I digress).

But I get your point. Because it's an "administrative" process, that's the state's way of avoiding double jeopardy, in that your license can be suspended administratively, then suspended again related to criminal conviction, all for the same offense.

I would argue that the issuance of a press pass is an administrative policy that doesn't afford due process (notwithstanding what I wrote earlier), but perhaps the courts indeed have applied the right to due process to criminal, civil and administrative action.

Edit: Obviously they have.

quote:

---

Pull your string and you say "assault female staffer" - 3 times in the first page of the thread.

---

Is there a proper frequency for true statements in a thread?

quote:

---

You’re entitled to an administrative hearing to challenge the officer’s determination that there was probable cause to subject you to a breath chemical test, yes.

---

It's more than that in Texas. One of the elements to be proven by a preponderance of evidence is that you were correctly read the statutory warning advising you of the consequences of refusal.

quote:

---

Pull your string and you say "assault female staffer" - 3 times in the first page of the thread.

---

How else do you phrase it? Acosta attacked female staffer?

quote:

---

Try it yourself in public to a woman you don't know and then report back on how it went.

---

Try what? Inadvertently brushing the arm of someone who is reaching across my body?

Run to a cop with that one. He will laugh in your face and tell you to grow a pair.

quote:

---

Try what? Inadvertently brushing the arm of someone who is reaching across my body?

---

Oh lord

quote:

---

quote:

---

but when it does, it can’t arbitrarily revoke them.

---

What are you basing that claim on?

---

Several hundred years of Anglo-American jurisprudence.

quote:

---

In Louisiana? That new? Because I’ve always been told that simple refusal to submit to a breathalyzer or blood test causes my license to be suspended for 12 months (maybe 6... it’s been a while since I’ve had a cop tell me that one ).

---

So, we are quibbling over temporal semantics a bit. Technically, your license is suspended immediately. However, you are entitled to said administrative hearing. It’s nearly impossible to win that hearing, but you are entitled to it, nonetheless