Ok, I confess I didn't get past the first paragraph because I went to the zerohedge article to see what it said.
First I found that it is specifically about Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia agreeing upon the interstate metrorail line, so it's limited to these three jurisdictions.
Second, the wording about the warrantless entries is this:
“In performing its duties, the Commission, through its Board or designated employees or agents, may:Enter upon the WMATA Rail System and, upon reasonable notice and a finding by the chief executive officer that a need exists, upon any lands, waters, and premises adjacent to the WMATA Rail System, including, without limitation, property owned or occupied by the federal government, for the purpose of making inspections, investigations, examinations, and testing as the Commission may deem necessary to carry out the purposes of this MSC Compact, and such entry shall not be deemed a trespass.”
Including in the law is a limiting word. So the only properties that can be entered is any lands, waters, and premises adjacent to the rail line that are owned or occupied by the federal government.
This article talks about how including is limiting, even with the words without limitation http://www.adamsdrafting.com/including-without-limitation/
I don't think this means what the original author thought it meant. :)
Generally not a good idea to respond to something you didn't read. I covered those details at the end of the original post.
True, and you are a clever author, I appreciate the things you write. I didn't want to be arguing in my head about it. :(
Oh, I do make mistakes quite a bit. I did read the article though from Zerohedge so I knew it was limited in scope. Though unless the homes in question are homes of federal employees they "should" still require a warrant. Though it is hard to know what they will do with this. Seems like a dangerous precedent and/or slippery slope.
Just trying to help with the concern level a tad. :)
Yep. Thanks.
Though yeah, I get what you wrote. As I commented to others I simply hope it doesn't become a slippery slope situation.
I get your concern. I have PLENTY myself. But the key is in "including", not the geography. A private residence next to the metrorail that is not owned or occupied by the federal government can NOT be searched without a warrant according to this new law. (not even state gov is subject to this law)
and the camera, microphone, and recording device is already in your smart tv, but I'm sure you know that ;)