Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,

Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.

If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.

Thank you.

Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.

Supreme Court upholds strip searches even for minor offenses

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.

Re: Supreme Court upholds strip searches even for minor offenses

  • It's very disturbing.
  • I don't like this. I don't like it at all.
    Team Basement Cat imageKnitting&Kitties
  • Yeah, it's pretty awful.  I meant to bring it up here but forgot. 

    I just don't even understand how they could justify this.  Why is it yet another partisan split vote?  How could anyone justify that a strip search of a guy who's wanted for, what was it, not paying a fine?  Having a debt makes you a druggie or violent?

    Would a white guy be treated that way?  I'm thinking no.

    image
  • imageSibil:
    Yeah, it's pretty awful.  I meant to bring it up here but forgot. 

    I just don't even understand how they could justify this.  Why is it yet another partisan split vote?  How could anyone justify that a strip search of a guy who's wanted for, what was it, not paying a fine?  Having a debt makes you a druggie or violent?

    I believe so. I believe he'd also had the warrent quashed and carried the documentation showing that it had been quashed. Which also didn't help him.

    Team Basement Cat imageKnitting&Kitties
  • imagemeshaliu:
    imageSibil:
    Yeah, it's pretty awful.  I meant to bring it up here but forgot. 

    I just don't even understand how they could justify this.  Why is it yet another partisan split vote?  How could anyone justify that a strip search of a guy who's wanted for, what was it, not paying a fine?  Having a debt makes you a druggie or violent?

    I believe so. I believe he'd also had the warrent quashed and carried the documentation showing that it had been quashed. Which also didn't help him.

    Yeah, I wasn't even touching that the warrant itself was a mistake because I don't think that matters.  Should someone with a legit warrant be treated that way?  Nope.

    Wasn't there also something about how he was denied the ability to talk to his wife when that would have further helped him be released?  I read about this a few days ago, but I forget the details.  

    image
  • I haven't read the opinion, but I read an article about it yesterday and was confused by this part:

    "Kennedy also said people arrested for minor offenses can turn out to be "the most devious and dangerous criminals." Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh initially was stopped by a state trooper who noticed McVeigh was driving without a license plate, Kennedy said."

    Did Timothy McVeigh have a bomb up his ass labeled "Just for you, Oklahoma!" that, upon detection during a strip search, would have triggered long-term imprisonment and prevented the Oklahoma City bombing?  Or would his "devious and dangerous mind" somehow have been detected by the way his balls were hanging? 

    I understand the point Justice Kennedy is making, but this struck me as a particularly lousy example to support his point.

  • imageis_it_over_yet?:

    I haven't read the opinion, but I read an article about it yesterday and was confused by this part:

    "Kennedy also said people arrested for minor offenses can turn out to be "the most devious and dangerous criminals." Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh initially was stopped by a state trooper who noticed McVeigh was driving without a license plate, Kennedy said."

    Did Timothy McVeigh have a bomb up his ass labeled "Just for you, Oklahoma!" that, upon detection during a strip search, would have triggered long-term imprisonment and prevented the Oklahoma City bombing?  Or would his "devious and dangerous mind" somehow have been detected by the way his balls were hanging? 

    I understand the point Justice Kennedy is making, but this struck me as a particularly lousy example to support his point.

    You didn't happen to see the Daily Show bit on this, did you?  Or are you just in a mind meld with Jon Stewart?

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • imagebrideymcbriderson:
    imageis_it_over_yet?:

    I haven't read the opinion, but I read an article about it yesterday and was confused by this part:

    "Kennedy also said people arrested for minor offenses can turn out to be "the most devious and dangerous criminals." Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh initially was stopped by a state trooper who noticed McVeigh was driving without a license plate, Kennedy said."

    Did Timothy McVeigh have a bomb up his ass labeled "Just for you, Oklahoma!" that, upon detection during a strip search, would have triggered long-term imprisonment and prevented the Oklahoma City bombing?  Or would his "devious and dangerous mind" somehow have been detected by the way his balls were hanging? 

    I understand the point Justice Kennedy is making, but this struck me as a particularly lousy example to support his point.

    You didn't happen to see the Daily Show bit on this, did you?  Or are you just in a mind meld with Jon Stewart?

    I haven't watched TDS all week.  Did Jon Stewart say the same thing??

  • imageis_it_over_yet?:

    I haven't watched TDS all week.  Did Jon Stewart say the same thing??

    Almost verbatim.

    My mind. BLOWN.

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • imagebrideymcbriderson:
    imageis_it_over_yet?:

    I haven't watched TDS all week.  Did Jon Stewart say the same thing??

    Almost verbatim.

    My mind. BLOWN.

    Seriously?? 

    Cripes, I'm not even original. Crying

    ETA:  Or perhaps I should simply take solace in the fact that I'm not the only one who found the example weird.  Because it's weird, dammit.

    ETA2: Nope, I'm going back to the tears.  Three years of law school and all those years of practice, and the best legal analysis I come up with is the same as that by some non-lawyer comedian.  CryingCryingCrying

  • I can't even wrap my head around how insane this opinion is.  I just can't.  It's just plain gross.

    And the John Stewart episode was on Tuesday night.  It's a must watch.  Tom Goldstein is the guest, and he argued for the guy who was strip searched.

     

    Uploaded from the Photobucket iPhone App

  • imageis_it_over_yet?:
    imagebrideymcbriderson:
    imageis_it_over_yet?:

    I haven't watched TDS all week.  Did Jon Stewart say the same thing??

    Almost verbatim.

    My mind. BLOWN.

    Seriously?? 

    Cripes, I'm not even original. Crying

    ETA:  Or perhaps I should simply take solace in the fact that I'm not the only one who found the example weird.  Because it's weird, dammit.

    ETA2: Nope, I'm going back to the tears.  Three years of law school and all those years of practice, and the best legal analysis I come up with is the same as that by some non-lawyer comedian.  CryingCryingCrying

    If it makes you feel better, think of the possiblity that he has some writers that went to law school and are ex-lawyers on staff.

  • I haven't actually read the opinion, but surprisingly, I really have no problem with this ruling.

    I feel like I should, but I don't.

     

  • I expected to come in here and seethe with anger, but doesn't the majority opinion say that as long as jailers have reasonable suspicion that someone in the general prison population is hiding something in their body cavities, they can be strip-searched? That doesn't sound silly to me if you have mixed prison populations - though admittedly, I haven't got a clue how prisoners are separated and if officers know offhand who has been charged with what.
  • I haven't read the opinion yet but this really pisses me off. Why do we even bother pretending that the 4th amendment means anything?
Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards