I hate when I agree with Ginsburg
Me too...I'm surprised that Justice Thomas would be in the majority here.
That's nothing. You're agreeing with the ACLU.
Heheh. :) How many times do you think Scalia as believed one thing, the ACLU believed the opposite, and FReepers overwhelmingly sided with the Anti Christian Leftists Union?
I don't agree with the ACLU or Ginsburg. I see the ACLU's point (ouch, that hurt), but the court made better points. If Caballes had been forced to wait while a dog was brought in he would have been detained illegally. If the traffic violation had been bogus he would have been detained illegally. But the stop was legit... and if Caballes hadn't posessed any marijuana the cops would not have invaded his privacy.
It's easy to make the slippery slope argument and imagine hidden cameras in our bedrooms... but we don't hate that idea because of all the illegal things we could otherwise be doing in our bedrooms... We hate the idea of the government intruding in all the legal but private things we might do there. The court addressed this. "The legitimate expectation that information about perfectly lawful activity will remain private is categorically distinguishable from respondant's hopes or expectations concerning the nondetection of contraband in the trunk of his car. A dog sniff conducted during a concededly lawful traffic stop that reveals no information other than the location of a substance that no individual has any right to posess does not violate the Fourth Amendment."
But let this be a lesson to you all. When transporting massive quantities of an illegal substance, obey the traffic laws. ;-)