Posted on 04/02/2012 1:08:50 PM PDT by katiedidit1
The Supreme Court upheld Monday the power of jails across the United States to carry out invasive strip searches on all incoming detainees, including those suspected of minor offenses.
In a 5-4 ruling, it threw out an innocent New Jersey businessman's claim that his constitutional rights were violated when jailers showered him with delousing agent and lifted his genitals during his week behind bars.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Full body searches are done for the safety of the officers as well as the other perps in the holding cells. This is SOP in almost every jurisdiction.
What is sad is this man was innocent. His traffic fine had been paid and what he endured due to shoddy police or failure to wipe out his ticket is a disgrace. The man was placed in a jail/prison with over 1,000 gang members, deloused and strip searched for a fine he had paid years ago. If it happened to him...it could happen to YOU or me.
The man actually had a court receipt showing the item paid and went through this anyway. More here..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2867852/posts?page=82#82
Scary isn’t it? this really could happen to us or our children, parents, spouses. It would be so traumatic that it would change one’s life forever.
Remember when stories like this were repeated by crackpots and we made fun of them? Now, even if they're not true, they're certainly believable. If Rip Van Winkle went to sleep in 1986 and woke up today, he'd assume the USSR triumphed.
As a general matter, the federal government has legislated away soverign immunity. And, typically, you can sue individuals, though they will almost always be indemnified by the government.
Scalia is an originalist. The Fourth Amendment was adopted as a cure to a particular ill: the general warrant. If Scalia sees a case that fits this bill, he’s a great protector of the Fourth Amendment.
But let’s take this case. In 1791, would the Founders have thought it unreasonable to search a prisoner without a warrant? Of course not. For Scalia, end of discussion.
Even accepting your premise, that an evolving society into a “police state” would expand the definition of the Fourth Amendment, are you seriously asserting that jailers shouldn’t have a right to search those people that are being admitted to jail? When you go to jail, you lose rights. Your right not to be searched is one of those rights. That’s a police state?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.