As most things I post here, this is ridiculous. This article from The Blaze describes a situation where police were issued a warrant to search a woman’s house on the basis that her son argued in support of marijuana during a school event. The school then called child protection services and the police were included. Prior to receiving the warrant the officers would not allow the woman to enter her own house, which I understand and do not disagree with in general, but this is an example where a warrant should have never been issued. Yes, the woman had cannabis oil in the house, but that should be inadmissible because that search warrant should not have been issued in the first place.
My chief complaint about this whole ordeal revolves around that warrant and how “probable cause” was obtained. It was not because she had been caught buying the cannabis oil. From the article it was purely based on her sons pro-marijuana argument at school. Obviously we do not know whether or not he said there was items in their house, but that still shouldn’t matter because that was the *only* thing they had against her. Courts that actually follow the Constitution and laws would not have considered that to be enough.
My Political Stand 