someone they're placing under arrest .. it's sop.
I am, however, surprised that a jewish/catholic USSC decided the way
they did. It's way past time to make the USSC represent America's
demographics better.
On Apr 3, 1:10 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A boring and predictable right wing reaction.
>
> Next......
>
> On Apr 3, 1:08 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip-Searches for Any Arrest
> > ---
> > anyone who has been arrested should be searched
>
> > next ...
>
> > On Apr 3, 12:49 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip-Searches for Any Arrest
> > > By ADAM LIPTAK
> > > Published: April 2, 2012
> > > Recommend
> > > Twitter
> > > Linkedin
>
> > > comments (1892)
> > > Sign In to E-Mail
>
> > > Print
>
> > > Single Page
>
> > > Reprints
>
> > > Share
> > > CloseDiggRedditTumblrPermalink WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on
> > > Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people
> > > arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to
> > > jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of
> > > contraband.
>
> > > Mel Evans/Associated Press
> > > Albert W. Florence was strip-searched twice after being wrongly
> > > detained over a fine.
>
> > > Related
> > > Sidebar: Justices' Cerebral Combativeness on Display (April 3, 2012)
> > > Related in Opinion
> > > The Loyal Opposition: The Right to Strip (April 2, 2012)
> > > Connect With Us on Twitter
> > > Follow @NYTNational for breaking news and headlines.
>
> > > Twitter List: Reporters and Editors
> > > Readers' Comments
> > > Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
> > > Read All Comments (1892) »
> > > Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, joined by the court's conservative wing,
> > > wrote that courts are in no position to second-guess the judgments of
> > > correctional officials who must consider not only the possibility of
> > > smuggled weapons and drugs, but also public health and information
> > > about gang affiliations.
>
> > > "Every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be
> > > required to undergo a close visual inspection while undressed,"
> > > Justice Kennedy wrote, adding that about 13 million people are
> > > admitted each year to the nation's jails.
>
> > > The procedures endorsed by the majority are forbidden by statute in at
> > > least 10 states and are at odds with the policies of federal
> > > authorities. According to a supporting brief filed by the American Bar
> > > Association, international human rights treaties also ban the
> > > procedures.
>
> > > The federal appeals courts had been split on the question, though most
> > > of them prohibited strip-searches unless they were based on a
> > > reasonable suspicion that contraband was present. The Supreme Court
> > > did not say that strip-searches of every new arrestee were required;
> > > it ruled, rather, that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of
> > > unreasonable searches did not forbid them.
>
> > > Daron Hall, the president of the American Correctional Association and
> > > sheriff of Davidson County, Tenn., said the association welcomed the
> > > flexibility offered by the decision. The association's current
> > > standards discourage blanket strip-search policies.
>
> > > Monday's sharply divided decision came from a court whose ideological
> > > differences are under intense scrutiny after last week's arguments on
> > > President Obama's health care law. The ruling came less than two weeks
> > > after a pair of major 5-to-4 decisions on the right to counsel in plea
> > > negotiations, though there Justice Kennedy had joined the court's
> > > liberal wing. The majority and dissenting opinions on Monday agreed
> > > that the search procedures the decision allowed — close visual
> > > inspection by a guard while naked — were more intrusive than being
> > > observed while showering, but did not involve bodily contact.
>
> > > Justice Stephen G. Breyer, writing for the four dissenters, said the
> > > strip-searches the majority allowed were "a serious affront to human
> > > dignity and to individual privacy" and should be used only when there
> > > was good reason to do so.
>
> > > Justice Breyer said that the Fourth Amendment should be understood to
> > > bar strip-searches of people arrested for minor offenses not involving
> > > drugs or violence, unless officials had a reasonable suspicion that
> > > they were carrying contraband.
>
> > > Monday's decision endorsed a recent trend, from appeals courts in
> > > Atlanta, San Francisco and Philadelphia, allowing strip-searches of
> > > everyone admitted to a jail's general population. At least seven other
> > > appeals courts, on the other hand, had ruled that such searches were
> > > proper only if there was a reasonable suspicion that the arrested
> > > person had contraband.
>
> > > According to opinions in the lower courts, people may be
> > > strip-searched after arrests for violating a leash law, driving
> > > without a license and failing to pay child support. Citing examples
> > > from briefs submitted to the Supreme Court, Justice Breyer wrote that
> > > people have been subjected to "the humiliation of a visual
> > > strip-search" after being arrested for driving with a noisy muffler,
> > > failing to use a turn signal and riding a bicycle without an audible
> > > bell.
>
> > > A nun was strip-searched, he wrote, after an arrest for trespassing
> > > during an antiwar demonstration.
>
> > > Justice Kennedy responded that "people detained for minor offenses can
> > > turn out to be the most devious and dangerous criminals." He noted
> > > that Timothy McVeigh, later put to death for his role in the 1995
> > > Oklahoma City bombing, was first arrested for driving without a
> > > license plate. "One of the terrorists involved in the Sept. 11 attacks
> > > was stopped and ticketed for speeding just two days before hijacking
> > > Flight 93," Justice Kennedy added.
>
> > > The case decided Monday, Florence v. County of Burlington, No. 10-945,
> > > arose from the arrest of Albert W. Florence in New Jersey in 2005. Mr.
> > > Florence was in the passenger seat of his BMW when a state trooper
> > > pulled his wife, April, over for speeding. A records search revealed
> > > an outstanding warrant for Mr. Florence's arrest based on an unpaid
> > > fine. (The information was wrong; the fine had been paid.)
>
> > > More:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/us/justices-approve-strip-searches-...
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment