More 4th Amendment decided away in latest USSC decision

S

SmarterthanYou

rebel
In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 2712 (April 2, 2012) (5-4), the court opined that once in custody of the government, you have no personal right to privacy or protection of your own body, stating that the interests of preventing contraband or weapons in a government correctional facility outweighs the personal interests of your own bodily cavities, thus for ANY minor violation of the law, including an erroneous warrant not having been removed from a gov computer, one can be subject to a strip search/cavity search.

Because of the decision, NYC can now humiliate more minor offenders by strip searching them for the hell of it.

The great irony of Florence is that Mr. Florence was strip searched when jailed because of an erroneous record of an unpaid ticket. If his car was searched, he'd have no recourse there, either, because the erroneous record isn't subject to the exclusionary rule. So, what remedy do the people have to protect against careless police and officious bureaucrats who just don't care that you were arrested and searched based on wrong information, but allegedly in good faith? Apparently none, now.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 2712 (April 2, 2012) (5-4), the court opined that once in custody of the government, you have no personal right to privacy or protection of your own body, stating that the interests of preventing contraband or weapons in a government correctional facility outweighs the personal interests of your own bodily cavities, thus for ANY minor violation of the law, including an erroneous warrant not having been removed from a gov computer, one can be subject to a strip search/cavity search.

Because of the decision, NYC can now humiliate more minor offenders by strip searching them for the hell of it.

The great irony of Florence is that Mr. Florence was strip searched when jailed because of an erroneous record of an unpaid ticket. If his car was searched, he'd have no recourse there, either, because the erroneous record isn't subject to the exclusionary rule. So, what remedy do the people have to protect against careless police and officious bureaucrats who just don't care that you were arrested and searched based on wrong information, but allegedly in good faith? Apparently none, now.
Click to expand...

Damned conservative Supremes, narrowing down our rights.
 
why am I not surprised that a majority of people dont seem too uproarious about this decision. could it be that a majority of apathetic people don't care what happens to someone who's been arrested?
 
if they are not placed in GP...then no strip search. i'm on the fence with this issue, because the crime alone does not warrant the need to search...however, what do you say about security of the prison?
 
I'm not outraged about it because it is entirely predictable. The facts of the case are ridiculous. A black man riding as a passenger in a BMW was throw in jail on a bad warrant for failure to pay a fine while he had evidence that he paid the fine on him and was stripped search after a wrongful arrest. And the SCOTUS said it's cool.

It's nutso, but those are your conservative justices.
 
I started reading Breyers dissent on this, hoping it would provide some great rebuttal in any future case on the subject. Sadly, I was left seriously disappointed. While both sides of the court seem to differ greatly on what 'reasonableness' means in our bill of rights, we'll continue to be subject to the whims and fancies of government agents with only prayers for recourse.
 
christiefan915 said:
Damned conservative Supremes, narrowing down our rights.
Click to expand...


Thats funny.....you all routinely defend Obamas TSA strip searching people because they happen to some particular number in a line.....
even little children and old women in the 90's......
I wonder if you'll starting bitching about this when Romney is president....lol:palm:
 
bravo said:
Thats funny.....you all routinely defend Obamas TSA strip searching people because they happen to some particular number in a line.....
even little children and old women in the 90's......
I wonder if you'll starting bitching about this when Romney is president....lol:palm:
Click to expand...

When did I ever defend strip searching under any president?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 2712 (April 2, 2012) (5-4), the court opined that once in custody of the government, you have no personal right to privacy or protection of your own body, stating that the interests of preventing contraband or weapons in a government correctional facility outweighs the personal interests of your own bodily cavities, thus for ANY minor violation of the law, including an erroneous warrant not having been removed from a gov computer, one can be subject to a strip search/cavity search.

Because of the decision, NYC can now humiliate more minor offenders by strip searching them for the hell of it.

The great irony of Florence is that Mr. Florence was strip searched when jailed because of an erroneous record of an unpaid ticket. If his car was searched, he'd have no recourse there, either, because the erroneous record isn't subject to the exclusionary rule. So, what remedy do the people have to protect against careless police and officious bureaucrats who just don't care that you were arrested and searched based on wrong information, but allegedly in good faith? Apparently none, now.
Click to expand...

it is all for the convenience of the fuzz now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top