Author

Topic: Supreme Court Rules Jail Strip Searches for Minor Offenses OK (Read 906 times)

legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
While the strip search is not ok and that is what they ruled on.....

He was put in jail for not paying a traffic fine...         (Really, come on.  That is just plain wrong!)
that he did actually pay.......                                    (wait.... this really stinks!)
and he showed the officer official proof of payment before the arrest that the officer did not accept!

At what point should someone be allowed to sue the government for lost time, inconvenience and gross incompetence?
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Web Dev, Db Admin, Computer Technician
Quote
A New Jersey man who was strip searched in prison after being accused of failing to pay a traffic fine lost his Supreme Court appeal Monday. The 5-4 divided court found two county jails "struck a reasonable balance between inmate privacy and the needs of the (correctional) institution." The conservative majority concluded a "reasonable suspicion" standard could be applied when conducting examinations of newly admitted prisoners. Albert Florence said he was subjected to what he called a pair of intrusive, humiliating searches six years ago. But Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said the policy was designed in part to protect the safety of Florence and other inmates.

"Exempting people arrested for minor offenses from a standard search protocol thus may put them at greater risk and result in more contraband being brought into the detention facility," said Kennedy. "This is a substantial reason not to mandate the exception (Florence) seeks as a matter of constitutional law."

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito supported all or part of Kennedy's opinion.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46928883#.T3nqcafXZqM
Jump to: