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

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

SECRETS AND LIES NOTHING BUT SECRETS AND LIES!!
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 03:26 PM) FIRE BOWLES
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 03:26 PM) CONSTANT TURNOVER
azjetfan Icon : (03 March 2015 - 03:43 PM) I think we need to fire more people. Like Justin Beiber
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 04:22 PM) Kareem Jackson is a decent player, I would rather go elsewhere for CB though> He has been a streaky player, some bad seasons some good
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 06:23 PM) THE KNICKS
Chaos Icon : (03 March 2015 - 06:43 PM) @AdamSchefter: Filed to ESPN: Bills have notified LB Kiko Alonso he is going to be traded to Philadelphia for RB LeSean McCoy. Trade official next week.
Chaos Icon : (03 March 2015 - 06:43 PM) WOW. Rex is gearing up for ground and pound.
Chaos Icon : (03 March 2015 - 06:44 PM) Jets can sign Spiller now but they're going to need a new LB. Rex is gunning for David Harris.
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 07:44 PM) Jets should trade Harris to Minnesota for Minnesota for AP
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 07:44 PM) Throw in Ivory/Powell or a pick
ganggreen2003 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 07:45 PM) Damn they got Shady
ganggreen2003 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 07:45 PM) Do NOT give up Ivory
ganggreen2003 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 07:45 PM) Powell ok Ivory HELL NO
ganggreen2003 Icon : (03 March 2015 - 07:50 PM) Well that definitely opens the door for CJ Spiller to the JETS now that the Jills got Shady
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:12 AM) Spiller is a joke. 99 % of the time he gets tackled for a loss or a 1 or 2 yard gain maximum. He breaks a run here and there. he had one good year in his whole career. their is a reason he is a backup and not the starter. I suggest you guys that believe Spiller has anything to offer go through the play by play game logs. I did and he is horrendous.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:14 AM) Spiller cannot break a tackle period. I broke down last years game logs of his runs in a thread last year. He isn't even a pass catching rb. Fred Jackson catches most of the running back passes.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:20 AM) Unless Spiller comes tremendously cheap no thank you. Wouldn't pay more than a one year deal worth 1 million at most. All he has is speed. Not even on Sproles level. His stats are inflated. For instance he has 10 runs in a game and 9 of them are losses are or 1-2 yard runs. Then he breaks one on the outside for 40-70 yards. Not reliable at all. Even when he break one he is guaranteed a td
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:21 AM) Even in his 1200 yard rushing year he only had 6 tds rushing and 2 receiving
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:23 AM) Spiller is only valuable as a special teams player. Period By year 2010 ) tds rshng 1 rcvng 283 yards rshng
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:31 AM) meant 0 tds rushing in 2010, 2011 4 tds 561 yards rushing 2tds receiving, 2012 6tds 1244 rushing 2 tds receiving, 2013 2tds 933 yards rushing 0tds receiving, 2014 0tds 300 yards rushing 1td receiving.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 05:41 AM) His stats look decent on paper but if you actually go through the game logs of his career like I did his stats are extremely inflated. For instance one game last year he had 10 attempts for 8 yards another 4 attempts for -4 yards, another 6 attempts for 19 yards, another 10 attempts for 25 yards.Another game he had 12 games for 69 yards but 47 of it was on one play. Point is he sucks as a running back. Who wants a rb that gets stopped 99% of the time and breaks one play fir a long run. We need reliable backs not a slim chance of him breaking one
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 08:06 AM) "NFL released its first 2015 League Year cap report to teams. Teams w/most room: 1) Jaguars $64.058M; 2) Jets $52.901; 3) Raiders $52.598M."
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 08:06 AM) #2 baby
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 08:07 AM) WE DID IT!
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 08:07 AM) thnx idzik
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Yesterday, 08:09 AM) RE-HIRE IDZIK
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Yesterday, 08:10 AM) Well in all fairness, when I think about the Jets I do think about number two
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 08:30 AM) FIRE MACCAGNAN
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 08:30 AM) The Jaguars hired John Idzik for his expertise in contract negotiating
Chaos Icon : (Yesterday, 08:36 AM) ppl are going to get paid this offseason.
Chaos Icon : (Yesterday, 08:36 AM) so many teams have space
Chaos Icon : (Yesterday, 08:39 AM) eagles have 48M in cap space. Chip is going to go HAM this offseason.
Chaos Icon : (Yesterday, 12:35 PM) @RapSheet: The #Bills have traded for Matt Cassel, the team announced.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 12:43 PM) rex is gearing up his team
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 12:43 PM) a QB that won't turn it over. 2 stud Rbs for ground and pound and will now start building his defense
azjetfan Icon : (Yesterday, 01:49 PM) McCoys agent said the trade is not final and he hinted that he may not be willing to play there.
Chaos Icon : (Yesterday, 04:41 PM) @KristianRDyer: Source: If Marcus Mariota is at No. 6, Eagles will make trade with #Jets http://www.metro.us/...-mCQODxZ1xjBVA/ … via @metronewyork #NYJets
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 05:18 PM) Jets bringing in Kendall Langford and CHris Canty for visits
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 05:20 PM) Cassel blows
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 08:07 PM) I wouldn't mind trading down personally
azjetfan Icon : (Today, 09:48 AM) Vince Wilfork will be a FA. Pats will not pick up his $8 million option. Looks like they are gearing up to keep Revis.
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 11:35 AM) Bears shopping Marshall for a mid round pick
azjetfan Icon : (Today, 12:31 PM) What does his contract look like? Offer a 7th conditional 6th if we do something if the $$s are right.
azjetfan Icon : (Today, 12:37 PM) He is almost due 9.6 million this year and has 2 years left. He is defiantly better than Harvin although a little older @ 30
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Today, 12:55 PM) I'd rather sign Maclin or Cobb and then draft a WR early
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   NJAzrael71 Icon

  • Formerly FlyHi
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,638
  • 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   NJAzrael71 Icon

  • Formerly FlyHi
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,638
  • 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: 7,913
  • 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: 3,088
  • 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   NJAzrael71 Icon

  • Formerly FlyHi
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,638
  • 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: 7,913
  • 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: 4,306
  • 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.

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   NJAzrael71 Icon

  • Formerly FlyHi
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,638
  • 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: 7,489
  • 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   NJAzrael71 Icon

  • Formerly FlyHi
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,638
  • 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