MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Siding with security needs over privacy rights, the Supreme Court ruled Monday that jailers may subject people arrested for minor offenses to invasive strip searches.
By a 5-4 vote, the court rejected a challenge from a New Jersey man who argued it's unconstitutional to force everyone to strip down for inspection. Albert Florence was arrested by a state trooper because of an error in the state's records that mistakenly said he was wanted on an outstanding warrant for an unpaid fine. Even if the warrant had been valid, failure to pay a fine is not a crime in New Jersey......
But the court's majority said it's difficult for jail officials to know who's dangerous and who isn't among the 13 million prisoners they process each year because criminal records are often not available at the time of intake. The majority opinion was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Use link for complete report.
Comments
Would recommend reading the comments at the NYT, Daggers will likely quibble over how liberals contributed to this (OWS), some good comments NYT:
If Kennedy doesn’t even want to consider “second guessing” what the jailers are doing, then why even have courts at all? Oh, wait- I forgot. He thinks courts are to set health care policy
________________________
This is nothing but far-right political theater - giving the police more power to abuse citizens, largely at their whim, with no need for paperwork or judicial review.
The Supreme Court has turned into a right-wing political outfit, ever since the 5-4 Bush-vs.-Gore decision pushed through by 'conservative' Justices who turned their back on their support for 'state's rights' - long the most consistent conservative theme on the Court - in order to help install GW Bush as President - who then selected two more members, Alito and Roberts, who are thus barely legitimate.
This is a court that has put its own political agenda and ideology first, and which has put respect for the law and the Constitution second. One wonders if they could name this amendment, for example:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
________________________----------------
The party of limited government and unlimited government strip searches. Makes total sense!!
by NCD on Mon, 04/02/2012 - 3:17pm
TheRegister notes that it's not just strip searches - it's public humiliation.
Plaintiff noted he was forced to squat naked with 4 other men, searched twice when picked up as a *passenger* on a traffic violation he'd already paid, that the police mistakenly said he hadn't.
And then the guy walking a dog without a leash. Or the nun "trespassing" while protesting. What the hey - turn people upside down, we're all assholes anyway - now the police have the right to show it.
But who will show them?
by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 04/03/2012 - 4:42am