Not really?
It is only controversial because the Supremes have not ruled on it. I don’t like it, but that does not overturn arrests or convictions.
When Diana Ross rules on it, Lester Holt will be right, maybe. As President Trump restated what I already knew...NYC did not support that technique their police used, so they failed to take it to a higher court and lost it. A low court ruling does not carry to higher courts. During the debate, Lester Holt, a moderator, stuck his wrong two cents in the debate. He was wrong, and PDJT got it right. Not much was said about that afterward. Candy Crowley did the same in a previous debate. They have an agenda and that is pretty much all I am commenting on, but if you like, I don’t like the predicate, but I know the technique to use it legally.
Thanks though.
DK
“It is only controversial because the Supremes have not ruled on it.”
But they’ve already ruled many times on the same exact question (whether police can perform a search without a warrant or probable cause) and have always ruled that it is unconstitutional. The only new thing here is calling the search a “frisk” instead of a “search”, which is just playing semantics. It doesn’t change the fact that the Supreme Court has already ruled several times that this is unconstitutional.