A Pardon for Arpaio Would Put Trump in Uncharted Territory 

The only effective means courts have to prevent or stop governmental violations of constitutional rights is through injunctions. But injunctions have teeth only when they have the potential of a contempt conviction behind them. In other words, in issuing an injunction, a court is saying, “stop doing that or else.” The “or else” is a criminal conviction for contempt, leading to a fine, imprisonment or both. Absent the “or else,” the injunction is all but meaningless.

But if the president signals to government agents that there exists the likelihood of a pardon when they violate a judicial injunction that blocks his policies, he can all too easily circumvent the only effective means of enforcing constitutional restrictions on his behavior. Indeed, the president could even secretly promise a pardon to agents if they undertake illegal activity he desires.

Doomsday prepping for less crazy folk 

A pretty reasonable list. Spread between advice for likely events…

Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Damaged more than 300,000 homes in the US, left millions without power - some of them for up to two weeks.

And advice for much less likely events…

My advice? Heck yeah, if farming is your cup of tea, buy a plot of land in the countryside. But if you’d rather live the rest of your days without having to skin deer or plow a field, focus on better quantified and substantiated risks - and don’t let asteroids or space zombies keep you up at night.

CCTV + Lip-Reading Software = Even Less Privacy, Even More Surveillance | Techdirt 

Lip-reading CCTV software could soon be used to capture unsuspecting customer’s private conversations about products and services as they browse in high street stores.

Security experts say the technology will offer companies the chance to collect more “honest” market research but privacy campaigners have described the proposals as “creepy” and “completely irresponsible”.

View all of the posts in the archive or subscribe to the feed for all posts.