Yesterday, the Supreme Court decided that the 13 million Americans who are arrested and admitted each year to local jails and detention facilities – including the many millions charged with misdemeanors and petty offenses like shoplifting, failure to pay a fine, traffic offenses and civil offenses like contempt and failure to pay child support -- may all be strip-searched without any reasonable suspicion to believe that they are concealing contraband in their private parts, if they will be placed into the jail’s general population.
The vote was 5-4, with Justice Anthony Kennedy writing the Court’s opinion, supported by the Court’s other, more conservative Justices (John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and ClarenceThomas).
All three female Justices (Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) dissented, along with Justice Stephen Breyer, who wrote the dissenting opinion.
In 1999, I won a decision from a federal judge in the Eastern District of New York declaring the blanket strip search policy of the Nassau County Jail unconstitutional because everyone admitted to the jail was strip searched without any reasonable-suspicion inquiry. I then commenced a class action on behalf of the 17,000 people arrested on minor charges and unlawfully strip searched in that jail in the previous three years.
In 2003, Nassau County conceded liability to every member of the class for the unconstitutional strip searches. In 2006, a judgment of liability was entered on behalf of the class and every member thereof. In 2010, after a three week trial, the Court awarded general damages of $500 to each class member for the human dignity violation inherent in each unlawful strip search.
We are not talking about felons convicted of serious crimes and sentenced to state prison. We are talking about the other 13 million lodged, often temporarily, in county jails each year, many on minor charges, not yet convicted, arrested for the first time, who are stunned to discover that they can be forced to strip naked before a corrections officer in full uniform (and often others in the room), lift their breasts, lift their penis and testicles, turn around and bend over and spread their cheeks to permit an visual inspection of the anal and vaginal cavities.
For many years, beginning in the 1980’s, every federal Circuit Court of Appeals decided that such blanket strip searching of non-felony arrestees was unnecessarily humiliating and degrading, a gross invasion of privacy, and therefore a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Lots of empirical evidence supported the proposition that these visual body-cavity searches of minor offenders rarely turned up contraband not discoverable without them. For example, in Nassau County, of 75,000 strip searches conducted on new admits over a five-year period, only 16 produced contraband- 13 of which would have been detected in a patdown or a search of shoes or outer clothing. In the three instances in which contraband was found on the detainee’s body or in a body cavity, there was a drug or felony history creating individualized reasonable suspicion. In other words, none of the 75,000 visual strip and body-cavity searches could be said to support the necessity of the jail’s suspicionless blanket strip search policy.
Over the years, professional correctional associations came to adopt standards that forbade suspicionless strip searching. Ten states prohibited them. Many jails, either voluntarily or through civil rights litigation in the courts, came to adopt a reasonable suspicion standard and did away with blanket strip searching of new admittees charged with non-felony offenses. Magnetometers (metal-detectors) came to be commonly used instead to screen new arrivals, with no diminution of institutional security. The issue seemed to be resolved.
Beginning in 2008, however, conservative judges in the Eleventh, Ninth and Third Circuits issued decisions endorsing blanket suspicionless strip searching for the first time, setting the stage for yesterday’s Supreme Court decision in Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington.
Justice Kennedy’s decision for the Court hardly mentions the invasion of privacy inherent in the challenged strip-searching, nor does it discuss the empirical evidence necessary to resolve the question of whether such wholesale strip-searching of millions each year is necessary and justifiable.
Justice Breyer’s more persuasive dissent does, but unfortunately, the Court’s moderate wing has only four votes. The 2000 and 2004 elections of George W. Bush were watershed events, giving control of the United States Supreme Court to conservatives apparently inclined to radically remake American constitutional law.
The Citizens United decision removed limits on huge corporate and individual campaign contributions, further corrupting our politics. The oral argument on Obamacare last week revealed a willingness to curtail the federal government’s power to regulate interstate commerce, which for at least half a century had been thought to be virtually unlimited. Now, after Florence, millions of us have lost important constitutional protection against unnecessary and unreasonable searches and seizures.
Where was the outrage from you "bleeding heart liberals" when the Black Panther party put up a bounty, dead or alive for the capture of Mr . Zimmerman. TOTAL SILENCE on by you !!! How about that over 95% of the Black voting population voted for Obama. Any prejudice there? Don't dare lecture me on racism, my parents and grand parents weren't slave owners. This president has done more to tractor race relations than any other in history. He dares to compare himself to Lincoln. What a pair of stones!!! Not only is he playing the race card, now he is using class warfare. He thinks he is in Russia and is a Bolshevik. From those who have to those who don't, sound familiar?
Why wouldn't African Americans feel more comfortable with an African American? I just ask that you stop the vitriol and address the facts. That would be helpful.
Now as to "How disrespectful to refer to our President as a Bolshevik.": Is that being disrespectful? I think not. The wanted a revolution and they got it. Look what happened to Russia after that. Looks what happening to our country under this president . More racial tension, more unemployment, higher debt, the list goes on. He was NOT ready for prime time and wait, he is one of the 1%.
Now as to class warfare. It is class warfare when you pit the haves against the have nots. It is class warfare when you denigrate people that achieve. That is what happened in Germany. The Jews who had achieved wealth were the target of Hitler and his National Socialist German Workers' Party. Gee that sounds familiar, doesn't it? This tactic is defiantly NOT what America stands for. We are a country that rewards achievement! Call it what it is Class Envy = Coveting.
In any case their views are certainly fantasy with no real world logic attached.
Hitler opposed the Jews because they were Jewish, or else he would have simply opposed rich people in general, no? You know what they say: first one to play the Hitler card loses the debate. Discussing tax rates is NOT the same as "pitting people against each other." If that's how you see it, why don't you call it warfare when tax rates for the rich are lowered, creating a huge budget deficit? Btw, do you think that Herman Cain would have gotten 95% of the vote as the GOP nominee?
Therefore Capital Punishment is extremely Anti-Christian, especially considering that Jesus was executed, after a trial, for breaking the laws of the Roman imperial goverrnment. However unborn fetuses are entitled to the same rights as humans who have been born (naturally or by caesarian), and innocence has nothing to do with it. If a mother wishes an abortion, she has every right to decide what to do with her body. There is nothing un-Christian involved, although the celibate elderly Bishops of the Catholic Church might disagree. But most Catholic women do use contraception and are willing to have abortions. Among most Protestants, including their pastors, aborttion is not considered un-Christain or immoral.
Do you feel the same about sperm? What is your perspective on contraception? What is your perspective on Capital Punishment? Your must follow your conscience. If you get pregnant you can make your own choices. Other women should follow their own conscience. You have no business ordering other Women, as to how they use their bodies. Your argument that is flawed, because most people don’t think of abortion as murder, and believe abortion should remain legal. I am 61, and recall when Abortion was illegal. In NYS it became legal by legislation, a year before Roe v Wade. The NY Senate had a Republican Majority, and Governor Rockefeller was a Republican. The Republican Party supported Women's Rights, so Rockefeller was rewarded a few years later by being appointed President Ford's Vice President. The Republicans also supported an Equal Rights Amendment, to guarantee women full Civil Rights, from the early 20th Century thru Jerry Ford's term as President. Starting in 1980, the Republican Party fell from grace. The GOP is probably at it lowest point since 1856, and will either have to reinvent itself as representing intelligent thought, or will end up as a regional party representing the redneck states. Women are a majority of Americans, and tend to vote more frequently than men. The Republican Party's current misogyny results in the GOP aborting electoral success nationwide. Now ain't that grand?
That said, I think the debate has gone completely insane, with the recent efforts of awarding "personhood" to fertilized eggs being the latest craziness. What are the implications of this, and who will be monitoring all these embryos? Will they get social security numbers? If the woman miscarries, will there be murder or manslaughter charges? What if the mother had been drinking, or the father hadn't done everything to keep his sperm up to snuff? Should we have embryo funerals?
If the Republicans are not waging a war on Women, why do they not support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, an Act of Congress enacted by the 111th United States Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama on January 29, 2009? The bill amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination resets with each new discriminatory paycheck. It benefits women who upon doing equal work as men, have not received equal pay for their work. To a large extent, ObamaCare benefits women and children.The Republicans' wish to deny medical care to women and children is obnoxious. The Republicans advocating against guaranteed medical care and against covering pre-existing conditions is very much anti-women. Why is it the Republicans are against everything except war and capital punishment and allowing crazies to carry concealed guns? War and Execution and using guns on people are certainly more anti-life than contraception and abortion? A fetus has no civil rights, but if the Republicans believe it does, than any embryo conceived in the USA should be guaranteed US natural citizenship, unless the GOP is full of greater stink than mere hypocrisy.
What is sad is there are many who oppose comprehensive sex education and easy access to birth control, while favoring the virtual abandonment of both mother and child if they can not afford health insurance.
What's sad is that here we are in 2012 and the Equal Rights Amendment still hasn't been passed. What's sad is Newt Gingrich addressing the NRA and telling them they haven't been aggressive enough in their war on gun laws even though they supported assault weapons, cop killer bullets and the stand your ground law. What's sad is the intolerance and bigotry I see coming from the right every day. What's sad is the hijacking of the second amendment which gave the states the right to maintain a militia and bear arms into an amendment that says every lunatic in the country should carry a concealed weapon and use it as often as possible. What's sad are all these things and the fact that they are somehow wrapped in the American Flag makes it even worse.
It is a happy commentary of our society that we go out of our way to protect animals. It is a happy commentary of our society that we engage in birth control. Please read the following: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/world/africa/in-nigeria-a-preview-of-an-overcrowded-planet.html?_r=1&hp
Here are some contrasting views that at least deserve respectful consideration: Many woman opposed the equal rights amendment, fearing it would bring an end to reasonable distinctions between the genders (such as military service and combat). Obamacare's mandate is seriously flawed, as it allows you to get sick without insurance, pay a fine that in no way approximates the premiums you avoided paying, and then you get insurance to cover your illness. It actually encourages companies not to pay for health insurance as a benefit because the penalty is much lower than the premiums they would have paid. If you could get car insurance after your accident, and it would still protect you, why would you bother to get insured? Republicans do not want crazies to carry guns, they just don't think you keep crazies from getting guns by lessening the gun rights of law abiding citizens. Saying Republicans are against everything except war and capital punishment is a childish exaggeration. Let me ask you a question: Why is there so little discussion of homelessness? is it because it disappeared ? Or because there is no Republican in the White House? Let us try to have a little respect for differing views.
Demonstrators against abortion clinics should have the same right to demonstrate as Occupy Anyplace people. I have a question for Sussman: Are labor unions a special interest group?
In comparison, there is no liberal wing in the House of Representatives or in the US Setate. In Congress, the two wings are moderate vs ultra-conservative. US Politics have been increasingly conservative since 1974. It is possible that as of 2013 our congressional politics will begin swinging back from conservative to moderate. The 2014 elections will cause Congress to swing back to moderate. Perhaps Congress will even become liberal again, if the Republicans continue to obstruct legislation.