Quote:
Originally Posted by Cotton Hill
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/02...g-checkpoints/
Setting up random drug search checkpoints is illegal according to the supreme court, but apparently setting up FAKE drug search checkpoints and then searching anyone who acts 'suspiciously' when they see the fake checkpoint is ok.
I, for one, am shocked, shocked that the author of a foxnews.com article misread a Supreme Court opinion.
In City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, the Court never said "actual drug checkpoints are not legal and that police can randomly stop cars for just two reasons: to prevent immigrants without legal permission to be in the U.S. and contraband from entering the country and to get drunk drivers off the road..."
The issue is whether the checkpoint is merely a cover for general crime control purposes. To wit:
Quote:
The primary purpose of city's drug interdiction checkpoint program, wherein city police officers demanded driver's licenses and registrations, peered into windows, and led drug-sniffing dogs around automobiles was indistinguishable from city's general interest in crime control
But the Court leaves the door open to drug stop programs:
Quote:
In determining whether individualized suspicion is required to support a stop of a motorist's vehicle, the Supreme Court must consider the nature of the interests threatened and their connection to the particular law enforcement practices at issue.......
this program was not justified by severe and intractable nature of the drug problem, checkpoints could not be rationalized in terms of highway safety