Supreme Court scales back warrantless vehicle searches

April 21, 9:30 PMWichita Independent ExaminerGeoff Caldwell

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Wichita Independent Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Photo: U.S. Supreme Court website

Overruling a 28 year precedent, the Supreme Court today limited the ability of police to perform warrantless vehicle searches after the arrest of a suspect.  Especially when the arrest is for something as minor as a traffic violation and the suspect is secured and there is no threat to officers.

Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens stated:

"A rule that gives police the power to conduct such a search (Belton warrantless) whenever an individual is caught committing a traffic offense, when there is no basis for believing evidence of the offense might be found in the vehicle, creates a serious and recurring threat to the privacy of countless individuals.  Indeed, the character of that threat implicates the central concern underlying the Fourth Amendment--the concern about giving police officers unbridled discretion to rummage at will among a person's private effects."

Chief Justice Alito writing for the four dissenting justices argued the doctrine of stare decisis (established legal precedent) and that today's decision "will cause the suppression of evidence gathered in many searches carried out in good-faith reliance on well-settled case law.."  The dissenting justices were also concerned that the decision effects what has been taught in police academies and law enforcement training programs over the past 28 years.

For those who know me personally, you know I'm a firm supporter of law and order and police officers across the nation.  Yet I have been troubled for years that being pulled over for a minor traffic violation could result in someone having their vehicle and any personal possessions searched on a whim. 

Today's ruling brings back some reason to the idea of  warrantless searches.  Police officers still have the power to search without a warrant when circumstances dictate, but balances that power more closely with the framer's intent of protecting us from unwarranted search and seizure.

Justices joining the majority opinion were:  Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, David Souter and Clarence Thomas.  Chief Justice John Roberts,  and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer joined Alito in dissent.

Yes, you read the above correctly.  Justices Scalia and Thomas JOINED Justices Ginsburg and Souter.  Two of  the most conservative Justices collaborating with two of the more liberal minded.  Now that's what I call meeting in the middle.

The case is: Arizona v. Gant No. 07-542

I also suggest reading J.D. Tucille's (national civil liberties examiner) article on a Massachusetts court case involving warrants, GPS devices and the impact down the road on our civil liberties:  Vehicles tracked without warrants

Additional information can also be found at:
Supreme Court Web Site
AP story