It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
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.
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 publ“Every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be required to undergo a c
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.
it ruled, rather, that the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches did not forbid them.
Originally posted by Homedawg
Don't commit any crimes and you don't have to worry about a strip search
Originally posted by spacedonk
...The creeping state controls and powers they are awarding themselves is getting crazy.
...Can you call it a constitution anymore? It seems to have been totally diluted and taken away from you America. (OBAMA - Order Butchery of the constituiton And Manipulate America.)
Justice Breyer wrote that there was very little empirical support for the idea that strip-searches detect contraband that would not have been found had jail officials used less intrusive means, particularly if strip-searches were allowed when officials had a reasonable suspicion that they would find something.
For instance, in a study of 23,000 people admitted to a correctional facility in Orange County, N.Y., using that standard, there was at most one instance of contraband detected that would not otherwise have been found,
Judge Breyer wrote. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined Justice Breyer’s dissent.
Originally posted by AuranVector
reply to post by spacedonk
S&F Didn't johncarter start a thread entitled "We Are This Far From A Turnkey Totalitarian State" not that many weeks ago?
The title of his thread says it all. We are in a totalitarian state already -- it just hasn't become obvious to the masses.
That the Supreme Court can uphold this, means they have no interest in protecting the average citizen or the founding documents of this country.
It would not surprise me if the Supreme Court upholds Obamacare.
What the Obama supporters do not understand is that Obamacare isn't really about healthcare. It's really about a massive expansion of Federal power. It's about creating more opportunities for the Feds to confiscate private income in the form of higher taxes & penalties.
And how do you think the Feds are going to spend the increased revenue?
To help the common man? No chance.
It will disappear into the pockets of their cronies -- corrupt politicians, civil servants, union bosses, corporate heads, privateers, etc.
Extracted from the article:
"A nun was strip-searched, he wrote, after an arrest for trespassing during an antiwar demonstration."
Have a good day.
edit on 3-4-2012 by AuranVector because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Kluute
Wow, and I thought us Brits had it bad being completely unjustifiable spied on through all our comms!
But this! THIS!
It's getting out of hand.