In early April, the U.S. Supreme Court turned its back on the Fourth Amendment interests of those charged with minor offenses when it held they could be routinely strip-searched when admitted into jail populations. That ruling, in Florence v. County of Burlington,1 came just 10 weeks after the court had delivered its groundbreaking and surprising endorsement of Fourth Amendment rights when it ruled in United States v. Jones2 that police use of GPS devices on cars were searches governed by the Constitution.
The strip-search decision in Florence, which swept away contrary rulings from many circuits (including the Second Circuit), was widely criticized by those concerned about the degrading nature of strip searches. And its impact is greatly magnified by the court’s 2001 ruling inAtwater v. Lago Vista3 that police can arrest and process (rather than simply issue a summons and release) people for the most trifling of offenses (in that case, seat-belt violations by a mother and her children). Remarkably, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, each of whom joined the majority in Florence and each of whom is a reliable supporter of law-enforcement officials, penned concurring opinions attempting to mitigate the damage of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s harsh opinion for the court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
