Chalk one up for Souter

It’s about time Justice David Souter made offered a rational opinion.

Next question after reading this article, when do the roadblocks go away?

A passenger in a car stopped by police has a right, just as the driver does, to challenge the constitutionality of the stop, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Monday’s unanimous ruling clarified the breadth of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits police from stopping vehicles without a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing. Evidence found in the course of an illegal stop usually cannot be used at trial.

The justices reversed a California Supreme Court ruling that said a passenger — unlike the driver — would feel free to leave the car and therefore would not be detained for purposes of the Fourth Amendment.

Writing for the court, Justice David Souter, said that view defies reality. “A sensible person would not expect a police officer to allow people to come and go,” he said, stressing that the police show of authority restricts a passenger’s sense of freedom. Souter said that most U.S. courts had adopted that view and that the California state court was in the minority.

Monday’s decision threw out the conviction of Bruce Brendlin, who was caught with drug paraphernalia after the car in which he was riding was stopped. The officers lacked grounds to pull the car over, and Brendlin argued that the drug evidence had to be kept out of court.

I’ve been stopped at least three times since I moved to my current county for NO REASON, other than I was unlucky enough to come upon a police roadblock. What were they checking for? Terrorists, I’m pretty sure. I managed to sneak through each time, mostly because I don’t make a habit of driving drunk and I don’t keep my carry pistol laying out on the passenger seat.

Nevertheless, I don’t like the roadblocks. They don’t make me feel any safer, they’re primarily an impediment to forward progress. And, they cost me money, because I’m paying th salaries of the guys with guns who implement the roadblocks.