[Lazamataz]

Another day, another privacy lost.

[Lazamataz]

I guess we all know which way the court will be deciding when probes and sensors are devised that can peer into your house.

[yellowdoghunter]

What a sad day for freedom.

[Wheee The People]

I hate it when the dog sniffs your crotch.

[Pondman88]

Can't say I like this ruling.......

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

What happens when the dog sniffs out the drugs that is said to be found on our money?

Will they take the couple hundred bucks I carry and confiscate my car, seize my home?

BigMack

[hobbes1]

Pretty Sad, when the only justices on the CONSERVATIVE side, are Ginsburg, and Souter.

[E Rocc]

Sheeesh....they basically just vacated the right to decline when they "ask" if they can search your car. The cops can say you "acted nervous" (who doesn't, when getting pulled over??) and bring in the dog. Dishonest ones can toss a roach in the car...

-Eric

[FreePaul]

This court, along with too many of our otherwise upstanding citizens, will tolerate any police state measure if is invoked in the "War On Drugs."

[NEPA]

I hate when I agree with Ginsburg

[ikka]

Judges need to get out in the real world a little more.

Surrounded by a Praetorian Guard of police officers who all treat them so nice, no wonder they allow law enforcement more and more leeway - aren't all cops like the nice, respectful, good men that drive them around from place to place in their SUVs?

[verity]

Paranoid bump.

[ellery]

Okay, so in this case the dog was used while the defendant was "lawfully seized in a traffic violation." How long before dogs are used at the drunk-driving roadblocks, where everyone is seized with no probable cause? How long until cops have the dogs stroll around shopping center parking lots? Still slip-sliding down that slippery slope...and the defenders of this crap will only scream bloody murder when it's THEY who are inconvenienced.

[oh8eleven]

...ruling that drug-sniffing dogs can be used to check out motorists even if officers have no reason to suspect they may be carrying narcotics.
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny." - T. Jefferson

[Lexington Green]

You are free to submit... Is this what Bush means by ''freedom''?... hardly worth fighting for.

[thoughtomator]

There goes that Amendment. Strike "unreasonable search" from the record.

[Sloth]

I'm glad to see virtually nobody on this thread defending the decision... though I'm sure they'll show up soon enough. :(

[Finalapproach29er]

Unbelievable. These people are no Conservatives.

[pageonetoo]

Another day, another privacy lost.

Your Papers, please...

[mvpel]

Be careful to insure that the officer does not touch your car during the sniff, according to Boston T. Party's "You and the Police."

[thompsonsjkc]

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Maybe the SCOTUS needs a refresher on the Fourth Amendment.