Supreme Court approves 'informational roadblocks' by police - GoFuckYourself.com

ThunderBalls · 01-13-2004, 09:43 AM

We are turning more and more into a police state.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/13/sc....ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday gave police leeway to use random roadblocks to track down criminals.

Justices said in the 6-3 ruling that police checkpoint stops, when used to seek information about recent crimes, do not violate the privacy rights of other motorists.

The court overturned a decision by the Illinois Supreme Court, which had ruled that it was not an emergency in 1997 when officers stopped cars at an intersection outside Chicago to pass out leaflets seeking information about a fatal hit-and-run.

Justice Stephen Breyer said that "police appropriately tailored their checkpoint stops to fit important criminal investigatory needs."

Three justices, however, expressed concerns that the ruling could open up motorists to police interference without yielding information about crimes.

Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, disagreed with part of Breyer's ruling.

"There is a valid and important distinction" between seizing a person to determine whether he or she has committed a crime and seizing a person to ask whether that person "has any information about an unknown person who committed a crime a week earlier," Stevens wrote.

The case was a follow-up to a 2000 Supreme Court ruling that roadblocks intended for drug searches are an unreasonable invasion of privacy under the Constitution.

Breyer said that in the Illinois case, authorities were investigating a specific crime -- and one that resulted in a death.

The Illinois checkpoints had been challenged by Robert Lidster, who was arrested and convicted of drunken driving after being stopped at a roadblock. The roadblock had been set up at the same spot and time of day that the hit-and-run took place, in hopes of getting tips. Authorities said that Lidster nearly hit an officer at the scene.

The ruling is a victory for Illinois and 14 other states which had asked the court to use the case to clarify how far police could go to seek information about crimes.

Breyer said that short stops, "a very few minutes at most" are not too intrusive on motorists. Police may hand out a flyer, or ask drivers to volunteer information about crimes, he said.

In the partial dissent, Stevens said that motorists will be trapped by the checkpoints.

"In contrast to pedestrians, who are free to keep walking when they encounter police officers handing out flyers or seeking information, motorists who confront a roadblock are required to stop, and to remain stopped for as long as the officers choose to detain them," he wrote.

TheEnforcer · 01-13-2004, 09:56 AM

Fucking USSC sells out our freedomsa regualarly.

Nick · 01-13-2004, 09:58 AM

startin' to feel like a police state... neighbor watching neighbor.. scary shit!

01-13-2004, 09:43 AM	#1
ThunderBalls So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Mesosphere Posts: 2,926	Supreme Court approves 'informational roadblocks' by police We are turning more and more into a police state. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/13/sc....ap/index.html WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday gave police leeway to use random roadblocks to track down criminals. Justices said in the 6-3 ruling that police checkpoint stops, when used to seek information about recent crimes, do not violate the privacy rights of other motorists. The court overturned a decision by the Illinois Supreme Court, which had ruled that it was not an emergency in 1997 when officers stopped cars at an intersection outside Chicago to pass out leaflets seeking information about a fatal hit-and-run. Justice Stephen Breyer said that "police appropriately tailored their checkpoint stops to fit important criminal investigatory needs." Three justices, however, expressed concerns that the ruling could open up motorists to police interference without yielding information about crimes. Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, disagreed with part of Breyer's ruling. "There is a valid and important distinction" between seizing a person to determine whether he or she has committed a crime and seizing a person to ask whether that person "has any information about an unknown person who committed a crime a week earlier," Stevens wrote. The case was a follow-up to a 2000 Supreme Court ruling that roadblocks intended for drug searches are an unreasonable invasion of privacy under the Constitution. Breyer said that in the Illinois case, authorities were investigating a specific crime -- and one that resulted in a death. The Illinois checkpoints had been challenged by Robert Lidster, who was arrested and convicted of drunken driving after being stopped at a roadblock. The roadblock had been set up at the same spot and time of day that the hit-and-run took place, in hopes of getting tips. Authorities said that Lidster nearly hit an officer at the scene. The ruling is a victory for Illinois and 14 other states which had asked the court to use the case to clarify how far police could go to seek information about crimes. Breyer said that short stops, "a very few minutes at most" are not too intrusive on motorists. Police may hand out a flyer, or ask drivers to volunteer information about crimes, he said. In the partial dissent, Stevens said that motorists will be trapped by the checkpoints. "In contrast to pedestrians, who are free to keep walking when they encounter police officers handing out flyers or seeking information, motorists who confront a roadblock are required to stop, and to remain stopped for as long as the officers choose to detain them," he wrote.

01-13-2004, 09:56 AM	#2
TheEnforcer Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 2,855	Fucking USSC sells out our freedomsa regualarly. __________________ Hit me up below for all your advertising needs!

01-13-2004, 09:58 AM	#3
Nick Registered User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Bootypest Posts: 259	startin' to feel like a police state... neighbor watching neighbor.. scary shit!