Do you feel that the 4th amendment should protect them? Or perhaps a new amendment should be written to protect them and abolish power of subpoena?

I’m slightly biased as I ask this. I feel that the mind is “sacred” in a sense, that it should be considered a fundamental human right for an individual to be able to preserve privacy over their internally held thoughts and memories, and that the ability of the court to force an individual to speak or disclose part of their mind is a wild overreach of power and an affront to the personal liberty of the innocent.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    22 days ago

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    furthermore, you can always say ‘i dont recall’. no amendment required

        • Media Sensationalism@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          22 days ago

          Yes, exactly like that.

          Of course, it depends on whether the court can prove their recollection whether or not they can be punished, but the bottom line is that it’s still illegal and the court remains legally entitled to forcefully procure truthful thoughts and memories from a person.

          I don’t support any suggestion that updating the law doesn’t matter because it is sometimes difficult to enforce, if that was your intention.