Dave Jose vs Juvenile Court System on Due Process! Want your Kids back? x.com/i/broadcasts/1lKQRWNBM…

“A jury in San Antonio federal court on Monday found Bexar County liable for running an unconstitutional traffic stop operation that harnessed mass surveillance to target drivers with a pipeline of pretext traffic stops and unconstitutional searches.” sacurrent.com/news/san-anton…

Imagine getting this mad because someone doesn’t believe that a buzzing box is proof of a moon landing. Screaming at people doesn’t actually prove you’re smart and scientific. It actually does the opposite. Full debate at ladle.tv

NEW: A federal judge in Oklahoma ruled that police violated the Fourth Amendment by searching Flock and other license plate reader data without a warrant, accessing more than 50 records of a driver’s movements across multiple states over a month.

BREAKING: FEDERAL JUDGE RULES COPS USING FLOCK CAMERAS TO TRACK DRIVER FOR WEEKS WITHOUT A WARRANT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! A Federal Judge In Oklahoma Just Ruled That Police Violated Constitutional Rights When They Used Flock Cameras To Pull A Driver’s Travel History Without A Warrant. On October 1, 2026, The U.S. District Court For The Northern District Of Oklahoma Threw Out Evidence In United States V. Melisa Susan Kyle. The Court Said A Warrantless Search Of Flock & Another Plate-Reader System Was An Illegal Search Under The Fourth Amendment. Tulsa County Deputy Freddie Alaniz Looked Up A California Plate During A Traffic Stop. The Search Returned More Than 50 Sightings Over At Least 30 Days In Many States. The Record Showed The Car Leaving Locust Grove, Oklahoma, Heading Toward The California & Arizona Border, Then Turning Back Toward Missouri. Here Is How The System Works. Cameras On Patrol Cars & Fixed Spots Snap License Plates. They Log The Date, The Time, & The Place. Officers Can Then Search That Stored History Across The Country. In This Case The Deputy Typed In Reasons Like “Traffic Violation” & “Investigation” & Got Weeks Of Movement Data. He Did Not Have A Warrant. He Did Not Have Probable Cause For That Search. The Judge Said People Have A Real Privacy Right In That Long Record Of Where They Go, Even On Public Roads. Older Cases Let Police Watch One Car On One Trip. This Is Different. The Court Called It Indiscriminate Mass Surveillance On A Dragnet Scale. Modern Plate Readers Can Follow A Car Across States For Weeks. That Kind Of Tracking Needs A Warrant. The Stop Itself Started Lawfully. The Deputy Said The Car Followed Another Vehicle Too Closely, About 30 Feet, Which Can Break Oklahoma Traffic Law. But The Court Said He Had No Good Reason To Hold The Driver After He Gave Back The License & Papers. He Kept Her To Run A Drug Dog. Nervousness, A Rental Car, Luggage, & A Short Trip Did Not Add Up To Real Suspicion Of A Crime. Because Both The Extra Detention & The Plate-Reader Search Were Unlawful, The Court Suppressed What Came After Them. That Includes The Later Vehicle Search & Statements. The Judge Said No Exception Saved The Evidence. This Order Does Not Shut The Cameras Off. It Says Searching The Stored History Of An American’s Drives, With No Warrant, Violates The Constitution. The Case Number Is 26-CR-00189-SEH.

What changed was the actual federal law. Congress reduced the NFA tax on silencers to $0. The NFA’s registration, approval, and recordkeeping requirements had historically been upheld as regulations supporting Congress’s constitutional power to collect that tax. Once Congress eliminated the tax, plaintiffs went to federal court and argued: if there is no tax left to collect, the government can no longer justify all of those regulatory requirements as necessary to administer a tax. The court agreed. It held that Congress had eliminated the constitutional basis that had supported those regulations and enjoined their enforcement against the covered plaintiffs and related parties. The court did not rely on some private affidavit, “remedy by necessity,” or a person declaring themselves exempt from the law. It was a conventional constitutional lawsuit based on Congress changing the statute itself. That is straight forward legal.

🚨 Meta’s 230 shield just got exposed in court. “Not immunity from suit” could blow up the legal trick Big Tech used for years to dodge discovery and bury censorship cases. If this stands, everything changes. Watch this now.

here it the link you guys asked for to join our Skool app law teaching: skool.com/real-law-revealed-…

Dave Shows the Problem with Attorneys and Legal Minds Real time x.com/i/broadcasts/1DGleVqyw…

Dave Shows the Problem with Attorneys and Legal Minds Real time x.com/i/broadcasts/1DGleVqyw…