If Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion, than I’ll go with it. The perp had a warrant out for him when he was stopped. I imagine that legitimized the stop and negated any constitutional concerns.
Doesn’t sound like that was the case. It sounds like he was stopped without much of a reason, then discovered the marijuana stuff, and then discovered he had a warrant. IANAL and I did not read more on this case than this one article, so I could be wrong. But it sounds like the court is saying that if you stop someone for no reason but later find out there was a reason, then its OK. If that is how it went down, I don’t think I can support it (though my opinion matters nil). In this day and age, there are so many laws, everyone in the country is a criminal without even knowing it.
About 2/3 of the camel already in the tent and you want more?
I dont see how the stop was unconstitutional if the guy had a warrant out for him. If the cop deliberately stopped him b/c he knew who he was, there’d be no court case. Its like if you are stopped and the cops run your plates and id and they find a warrant on you, they can’t search your car? I’m touching the safety tree, you can’t tag me?
Police are always finding out that people they have detained or stopped have outstanding warrants.