Yahoo! News – Supreme Court Won’t Hear Drug Dogs Case
You might have read earlier on the Writ about how the Supreme Court ruled (6-2) that cops could detain you, without probable cause, to have a drug dog sniff the exterior of your car. I had warned that rulings like this would mean that the cops could just randomly take drug dogs through the streets, through the parking lots, or even through your neighborhoods and up to your front door, on fishing expeditions for illicit drug activity. You may have even thought I was being alarmist.
Think again:
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider whether police can have drug dogs sniff outside people’s homes without any specific suspicion of illegal activity.
Justices let stand a lower court ruling that allowed the dog sniff, rejecting an appeal from a Houston man who said it was an improper police “search” that violated his Fourth Amendment right against arbitrary searches.
In so doing, the court declined to clarify the scope of police authority after it ruled 6-2 earlier this year that dog sniffs for drugs were OK outside a car if a motorist is lawfully stopped for a traffic violation.
Considering the potential for profit from drug asset forfeiture, and considering how police are judged based on number of arrests, we should be expecting door-to-door sweeps of neighborhoods by teams of cops and large drug sniffing dogs. You won’t mind, right? After all if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Oh, wait a minute. By “we should be expecting” I meant, “those of us in poor neighborhoods should be expecting”. I doubt very much they’ll be sending the pot pooch patrol to Beverly Hills, Lakeshore Drive, Auburn Hills, or the Upper East Side anytime soon. Besides, rich people don’t do drugs anyway.
Feeling any safer yet?
