NYJetsFan.com Forums: Judge Blocks Fla.'s New Welfare Drug Testing Law - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

RetireChrebet Icon : (26 August 2014 - 08:33 PM) Dimitri suspended for the rest of preseason. I'm sorry, I know we are bone dry at corner these days but they should have cut this prick on the spot . He's going to get torched regardless this year and I'd rather cut ties with any potential cancerous attitutudes before the season even starts.
RetireChrebet Icon : (26 August 2014 - 08:34 PM) Where I come from you take responsibility for your actions. Not showing up for a game is cowardly and selfish. f*** him
RetireChrebet Icon : (26 August 2014 - 08:36 PM) Also he doesn't know what the acronym AWOL means so he's also an idiot. No wonder he's never been anything but a journeyman corner is this league.
azjetfan Icon : (26 August 2014 - 09:11 PM) So how do you really feel?
RetireChrebet Icon : (26 August 2014 - 11:18 PM) I think my last three posts pretty much summarize how I feel haha. He's making 1.5 mill this year and no call no shows because his feeling are hurt. Would rather you play corner azjetfan than this guy
MikeGangGree... Icon : (27 August 2014 - 08:12 AM) Need 1 more for FFB!!
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (27 August 2014 - 08:39 AM) Stephen Hill is going to get cut, guy sucks. Greg Salas is a better football player and deserves a spot over him
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (27 August 2014 - 11:27 AM) So when do we show up to 115s house with pitchforks, tar and feathers?
Jetsfan115 Icon : (27 August 2014 - 12:03 PM) i'd rather see idzik go then hill. fire idzik
bleedsgreen Icon : (27 August 2014 - 12:21 PM) Hill is such a disappointment. I really was hopping for so much when he scored 2 TDs his first game
MikeGangGree... Icon : (27 August 2014 - 03:11 PM) We need to get the J-E-T-S chant back this year to the way it was
MikeGangGree... Icon : (27 August 2014 - 03:13 PM) idk if any of u guys went to any of the games last year[Im sure some of u did] but im not a fan of the drumline leading the chant
MikeGangGree... Icon : (27 August 2014 - 03:14 PM) its not the same as 70,000 people doing it during every kickoff and after every score
Jetsfan115 Icon : (27 August 2014 - 05:43 PM) injuries and poor QB play aren't good for a WR to develop
Jetsman05 Icon : (27 August 2014 - 06:08 PM) 115 and Hill. Lol!
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (27 August 2014 - 10:18 PM) the excuses, Hill is just a terrible football player. no debate, just a fact. guy is soft as shit as well
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:43 AM) right cause all our other WRs were lighting it up
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Yesterday, 07:04 PM) Hill is useless bro lol
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:05 PM) All I can say I streamed this game and if anyone thinks about recording it from NFL Network at 4pm Eastern Saturday.....DONT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:07 PM) This game was pure sh1t. Even though it was back up players the Jets got totally destroyed in this game. After seeing this game Im really worried about the Jets starting core because these backup guys looked like they shouldn't have even been on the field at all. I just hope the starters are 3000 times better than these guys that played in game 4
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:09 PM) The Jets got horse f*cked by the Eagles in this game.
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Yesterday, 09:24 PM) we are hosed in the secondary
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Yesterday, 09:26 PM) we need to cut this assclown patterson
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Yesterday, 09:34 PM) did Hill get cut yet?
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:36 PM) lol. We might need to look at the Eagles cuts for possible 2nd and 3rd stringers
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:36 PM) If they keep ZHill after this game I will be shocked.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:38 PM) Philly gave us a worse ass whipping than Detroit gave Buffalo. only difference is we scored
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:42 PM) Im just wondering what manning will put up on our secondary? 70?
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:12 PM) who cares about getting destroyed in a preseason game, especially the 4th one. Most of these guys won't even make the team
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:15 PM) Hill cut yet?
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:18 PM) FIRE IDZIK
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:21 PM) Yeah this game means nothing...except to Stephen Hill (who fumbled lol) and 115
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:23 PM) Hill is a bum, hes pretty much never shown much football skill. The Jets fucked up big time taking him over Alshon Jeffery.
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:29 PM) I'm still pissed off about that
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 10:43 PM) Its not that Im worried about the preseason game itself. i could care less about that. Its the fact of how bad we got destroyed. And some of the guys will be on the team and others on the fringe so getting destroyed like that doesnt fill me with confidence
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 10:44 PM) It would be one thing if it was just the second half or 4th quarter but this was the whole game. especially getting destroyed in the 1st quarter and at least part of the 2nd where a lot of the guys will be on the team
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 10:48 PM) 2nd and 3rd stringers making the team had something to prove and even our 2nd stringers got owned so yes Im very concerned. The first stringers need breaks and also if some of them get injured they need to step up. So no after this performance start to finish Im very concerned
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Today, 06:39 AM) Meh...you're reading too much into it
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Today, 06:40 AM) Even in seasons where the Jets blew, I haven't seen anyone refer to the preseason to complain. Ever.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 09:15 AM) fire izdik http://theredzone.or...rs/Default.aspx
Jetsman05 Icon : (Today, 11:17 AM) I picture Rob and 115 as real life friends
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 04:01 PM) Holmes can still play, problem is that hes also a cancer. He wore out his welcome with the Jets
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Today, 08:23 PM) did Hill get cut?
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Today, 09:00 PM) Haven't seen anything yet
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 09:06 PM) Whos ready for the season!!? WOOOOO
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Judge Blocks Fla.'s New Welfare Drug Testing Law The Liberal Pussies Strike Again

#1 User is offline   FlyHiJets Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,542
  • Joined: 06-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 24 October 2011 - 06:15 PM

In yet another show of people being liberal pussies & wanting to give welfare bums free reign again........

Judge blocks Fla.'s new welfare drug testing law


KELLI KENNEDY, Associated Press
MIKE SCHNEIDER, Associated Press


ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — A federal judge temporarily blocked Florida's new law that requires welfare applicants to pass a drug test before receiving benefits on Monday, saying it may violate the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.

Judge Mary Scriven ruled in response to a lawsuit filed on behalf of a 35-year-old Navy veteran and single father who sought the benefits while finishing his college degree, but refused to take the test. The judge said there was a good chance plaintiff Luis Lebron would succeed in his challenge to the law based on the Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals from being unfairly searched.

The drug test can reveal a host of private medical facts about the individual, Scriven wrote, adding that she found it "troubling" that the drug tests are not kept confidential like medical records. The results can also be shared with law enforcement officers and a drug abuse hotline.

"This potential interception of positive drug tests by law enforcement implicates a 'far more substantial' invasion of privacy than in ordinary civil drug testing cases," Scriven said.

The judge also said Florida didn't show that the drug testing program meets criteria for exceptions to the Fourth Amendment.

The injunction will stay in place until the judge can hold a full hearing on the matter. She didn't say when that hearing will be scheduled.

More than two-dozen states have also proposed drug-testing recipients of welfare or other government assistance, but Florida was the first state to enact such a law in more than a decade. Should any of those states pass a law and face a court challenge, Scriven's ultimate ruling would likely serve as a legal precedent.

The law's proponents include Gov. Rick Scott, who said during his campaign the measure would save $77 million. It's unclear how he arrived at those figures. A spokesman for the Florida Department of Children and Families deferred all comments to the governor's office.

"Drug testing welfare recipients is just a common-sense way to ensure that welfare dollars are used to help children and get parents back to work," said Jackie Schutz, a spokeswoman for Scott. "The governor obviously disagrees with the decision and he will evaluate his options regarding when to appeal."

Earlier this year, Scott also ordered drug testing of new state workers and spot checks of existing state employees under him. But testing was suspended after the American Civil Liberties Union also challenged that policy in a separate lawsuit.

Nearly 1,600 applicants have refused to take the test since testing began in mid-July, but they aren't required to say why. Thirty-two applicants failed the test and more than 7,000 have passed, according to the Department of Children and Families. The majority of positives were for marijuana.

State officials said Monday that applicants previously denied benefits for testing positive or refusing the test could reapply immediately. The Department of Children and Families will also approve all pending applications that await drug test results.

Supporters had argued applicants skipped the test because they knew they would have tested positive for drugs. Applicants must pay $25 to $35 for the test and are reimbursed by the state if they pass. It's unclear if the state has saved money.

Under the Temporary Assistance For Needy Families program, the state gives $180 a month for one person or $364 for a family of four.

Those who test positive for drugs are ineligible for the cash assistance for one year, though passing a drug course can cut that period in half. If they fail a second time, they are ineligible for three years.

Lebron, who is the sole caretaker of his 4-year-old son, said he's "happy that the judge stood up for me and my rights and said the state can't act without a reason or suspicion."

The ACLU says Florida was the first to enact such a law since Michigan tried more than a decade ago. Michigan's random drug testing program for welfare recipients lasted five weeks in 1999 before it was halted by a judge, kicking off a four-year legal battle that ended with an appeals court ruling it unconstitutional.

___

Kennedy reported from Miami.
Associated Press
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
I will not be forgotten. This is my time to shine. I've got the scars to prove it. Only the strong survive.

When someone annoys u, it takes 42 muscles in ur face 2 frown. BUT, it only takes 4 muscles 2 extend ur arm & b!tch-slap that mother@*?!&! upside the head!!
0

#2 User is offline   FlyHiJets Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,542
  • Joined: 06-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 24 October 2011 - 06:18 PM

And now the happy bums can continue to get their free support from the rest of us to buy their drugs. The problem is that these mother fuckers seem to think that welfare is a career and the liberal pussies on the federal courts apparently seem to agree with them. Way to give them something to strive for assholes.
I will not be forgotten. This is my time to shine. I've got the scars to prove it. Only the strong survive.

When someone annoys u, it takes 42 muscles in ur face 2 frown. BUT, it only takes 4 muscles 2 extend ur arm & b!tch-slap that mother@*?!&! upside the head!!
0

#3 User is offline   santana Icon

  • I'm batman
  • Icon
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 7,765
  • Joined: 03-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington DC
  • Interests:Keeping this place from breaking... and titties.

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 24 October 2011 - 06:45 PM

I didn't know federal judges who uphold the Constitution were liberal pussies
lol
Nyjetsfan.com Jets Fan Forum and Chat
0

#4 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,893
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 24 October 2011 - 07:45 PM

wether you agree or not I think we all saw this coming. All the lawyers had to do was get this in front of a Liberal judge. It will probably stand.
Posted Image
0

#5 User is offline   FlyHiJets Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,542
  • Joined: 06-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 24 October 2011 - 09:43 PM

View Postsantana, on 24 October 2011 - 07:45 PM, said:

I didn't know federal judges who uphold the Constitution were liberal pussies
lol



By that way of thinking, it's unconstitutional for jobs to require drug testing too then? it's the same damn thing. There's no constitutional violation in my opinion.
I will not be forgotten. This is my time to shine. I've got the scars to prove it. Only the strong survive.

When someone annoys u, it takes 42 muscles in ur face 2 frown. BUT, it only takes 4 muscles 2 extend ur arm & b!tch-slap that mother@*?!&! upside the head!!
0

#6 User is offline   santana Icon

  • I'm batman
  • Icon
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 7,765
  • Joined: 03-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington DC
  • Interests:Keeping this place from breaking... and titties.

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 24 October 2011 - 11:08 PM

Quote

Middle District of Florida

On the recommendation of U.S. Senator Mel Martinez, Scriven was nominated by George W. Bush on July 10, 2008 to a seat vacated by Patricia Fawsett. Scriven was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on September 26, 2008 and received commission on September 30, 2008.[1]


http://judgepedia.or...hp/Mary_Scriven

Quote

Melquíades Rafael Martínez Ruiz, usually known as Mel Martinez (born October 23, 1946), is a former United States Senator from Florida and served as Chairman of the Republican Party from November 2006 until October 19, 2007, the first Latino to serve as chairman of a major party. Previously, Martínez served as the 12th Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under President George W. Bush.


http://en.wikipedia....ki/Mel_Martinez

liberal much?
Nyjetsfan.com Jets Fan Forum and Chat
0

#7 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,235
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 25 October 2011 - 12:13 AM

View Postsantana, on 25 October 2011 - 12:08 AM, said:



You beat me to it Santana.

I love it when people bitch about liberal activist judges and it turns out that judge they're pissed at was appointed by a "conservative" Republican president or governor. Thanks Dubya.
New York Jets
Super Bowl III Champions


Los Angeles Lakers
16-times NBA World Champions

1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2009, 2010

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#8 User is offline   FlyHiJets Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,542
  • Joined: 06-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 25 October 2011 - 08:29 AM

Just because they're appointed by a moron doesn't mean they're not liberal. Anybody supporting a bunch of lazy ass drug addict bums is a liberal in my opinion. Stop thinking along party lines all the damn time. These are the same scum judges that think illegals should get free everything in this country.

What kind of example are these idiots setting for anyone? They're basically telling the country to not strive to do anything with your life because you can just force everyone else to support you. And yes....you can even use the taxpayer money to get high because we're only going to end up ruling that you can be on welfare for life because it would be "unconstitutional" to deprive you of your right to life, liberty and sponge off the rest of humanity. Sounds pretty liberal to me. They want to "liberate" everyone of their individual responsibility to support themselves and contribute to society in a positive way rather than continue to suck the money from it.

Court views: Real interpretation:
The rich should pay more. Be punished for success.
No drug testing for welfare recipients. I can get high and be a bum for life while having the taxpayers pay for it all!!!
Free education & healthcare for illegals. I don't need to become a citizen because then I will lose all of the freebies.

How is anyone in this country going to want to succeed if they're going to be punished for their success? Where is the incentive for welfare bums to get off their lazy asses and try to be successful in anything if they're only going to have to be punished for success & have to support not only themselves but also the scum illegals? There is no incentive other than personal satisfaction to be successful in this country any more. I'll keep my personal satisfaction while suffering to pay my bills because a bunch of scumbags in black robes say I have to support everyone else. All of the liberal pussies that supports those ideas can go f*** themselves.
I will not be forgotten. This is my time to shine. I've got the scars to prove it. Only the strong survive.

When someone annoys u, it takes 42 muscles in ur face 2 frown. BUT, it only takes 4 muscles 2 extend ur arm & b!tch-slap that mother@*?!&! upside the head!!
0

#9 User is offline   SecondHandJets Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,488
  • Joined: 28-November 05
  • Gender:Male

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 25 October 2011 - 02:29 PM

This isn't about welfare recipients or "liberal" judges. This is about "protecting the Constitutional rights" etc etc. It's bullshit but with these things, once precedent is set, it becomes defacto law so whenever a policy comes into effect that could potentially mess up the Bill Of Rights, every legal scholar throws on his twill jacket and reading glasses and starts playing with semantics.
0

#10 User is offline   FlyHiJets Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,542
  • Joined: 06-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 25 October 2011 - 04:45 PM

View PostSecondHandJets, on 25 October 2011 - 03:29 PM, said:

This isn't about welfare recipients or "liberal" judges. This is about "protecting the Constitutional rights" etc etc. It's bullshit but with these things, once precedent is set, it becomes defacto law so whenever a policy comes into effect that could potentially mess up the Bill Of Rights, every legal scholar throws on his twill jacket and reading glasses and starts playing with semantics.


The simple solution to this could be that the welfare application includes a disclaimer indicating that the results could be used against them should they be applying for benefits for a family rather than individual. That removes the precendent and the potential for so-called unlawful search & seizure of criminal evidence. The various welfare agencies are required by law to report any person that is a potential threat to themselves or others. A positive drug test indicates them to be that threat therefore requires the agency to turn over the drug test results. To me, it is not an unlawful search & seizure if the individual is signing the application for benefits knowing that the agency is required to make the results known to law enforcement if there is a positive result. If they did not know that law, that is still not a defense because ignorance of the law is not a defense in any criminal proceeding. The simple addition of the disclaimer removes any "violation" of anyone's constitutional rights. This isn't that difficult of a concept but for some people, common sense easily escapes them.

Nobody is forcing these people to apply for welfare benefits. The problem with welfare is that many people on the system think that welfare is a career opportunity.
I will not be forgotten. This is my time to shine. I've got the scars to prove it. Only the strong survive.

When someone annoys u, it takes 42 muscles in ur face 2 frown. BUT, it only takes 4 muscles 2 extend ur arm & b!tch-slap that mother@*?!&! upside the head!!
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users