RUSH: It was a busy weekend. Last night Kathryn and I were in the kitchen and she's been swamped doing a whole bunch of stuff and she said to me, "What's the big news this weekend? I haven't had a chance to pay attention," and I told her of all the things that happened, there's one story that really struck me. There's all kinds of stuff. I don't mean to put anything here in a very rigid order that says something is without question the biggest story of the weekend, but something is truly big that's not getting a lot of play and it happened in Indiana. "Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes." Did you hear about this? It's as though the Fourth Amendment doesn't exist. "In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry."
Now, stop and think of that for a moment. The cops do not need a reason. They want to enter your home in Indiana, and you have to let them. And here's the reasoning. "'We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,' David said. 'We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.'" And so basically you shouldn't resist because that will possibly lead to violence. And so one of the reasons for allowing the cops in Indiana to enter your house without cause for no reason whatsoever is simply so there won't be any violence when you resist them.
RUSH: In Indiana I guess it's official now: A man's home is no longer his castle. It's not a piece of legislation. It's a Supreme Court ruling. Believe me, folks, this is big. I don't know how this is constitutional. If the cops wanna come in your house, you can't stop 'em. They don't have to have cause, don't have to have a warrant, don't even have to have a reason -- and the judge says (summarized): "Yeah, I kinda like this because since you now have to let the cops in, there won't be any violence on the part of the homeowner trying to stop them." So what is this? It's all about getting people to acquiesce to this 'cause it's a nonviolent move?