K~....unless you made a credible threat, hang tight....however, your point is well taken.....generally speaking, I see expanded governmental action, broadened, justified, & manifested under wider, broad brush statutory schemes, e.g. the Patriot Act, et. al., & holdings like Garcetti v. Cerberallos (providing gov't. workers with less 1st Amend. protections), which many of us took ---- & continue to take ---- strenuous exceptions to, methinks we have some other more serious threats to face....besides, you seem harmless to me
unless having an opinion is unlawful.......but it would be interesting to hear more about that --- in another venue, someday......
....one thing I'm cool with & hopeful for is, notwithstanding the new President, y'all keep in mind that there maybe TWO Supreme Ct. justices retiring, which may indicate TWO opportunities for more liberal appointments, and subsequently, a more liberal approach & swing, a la the Brennan years of the '60's, when concerns such as yours led to decisions which still hold today ---- like Katz v. US, where the 4th Amend. protects people not places, & still controls, although that view has been somewhat eroded in the Scalia, Roberts, & Alito era.....so don't give up hope just yet.....I'm not
....just be careful walking over any bridge --- like Bukharin or drinking tea, a la Liventenko.....and keep your back to the wall in any restaurant.....I do :-)
