FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Because a cop can, intentionally or unintentionally, cause a dog to give a false positive, the use of a dog should not be sufficient evidenct to enter without a warrant. The court did well here.
Score one for the Constitution.
What about the F’ing police dogs with wings in the skies?
So when will they rule that cops have no right to chase people into their homes for the act of photographing them in public?
Porch is curtilage.
Shouldn’t have even been a question about the warrant requirement.
Bringing the dog onto the property is a search.
OTOH, there were some grow operations that I could smell from three doors down. Didn’t need a dog, but I still went and got a warrant.
How ‘bout the dogs at the border. When they hit on a vehicle the feds often literally dismantle the thing into a pile of scrap. I wonder what the ‘false positive’ rate is there. The dogs are very very good at their job, much better than Napolitano for sure.
Cops routinely misuse police dogs in all sorts of situations as a pretext for further intrusions. I don’t buy the Dr. Dolittle routine.
Good decision, especially now that the police state is booming.
Interesting breakdown of the votes:
Majority (Supporters of 4th Amendment)- Scalia, Thomas, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, Kagan
Dissent - Alito, Kennedy, Breyer, Benedict Roberts.
With this vote, after his Obamacare vote, Roberts is turning out to be a total disaster.
I would think this ruling might set a precedent for future rulings on searches/spying by drones, or at least give an inidcation on where the current Supreme Court members might stand on the issue.
I can see both sides of the argument, but since the Bill of Rights is a constraint on government that was a condition for the adoption of the Constitution, I think it good that we set some pretty high barriers to government action. Good call by the Court.
What if it's just one of those things dogs do?
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Another day and proof positive the ultra inferior, not supreme, court proves once again they are nothing but political hacks.
Now before you go and attack me because you agree with the decision please note SO DO I.
5-4 decision. Just how inferior are these black robed morons that there seem to be 4 who can never agree what a very short document with back up in the form of the Federalist papers, means when it comes to REQUIRING a warrant?
All it will take is for one more of these morons to retire and the NAPA in the White Hut to appoint another traitor to the constitution.
The 4 who voted against this should be immediately removed, tried for treason, and receive the proper penalty for said treason.
How much longer are we going to allow the government to erode the rights WE DID NOT give them?
We allowed them to conduct warrantless searches in airports, train stations, government buildings so they INFRINGED on the 4th Amendment and we did nothing.
This decision is simply a bump in the road for this government until the NAPA in the White House can tilt the court towards communism.
Then why is it not illegal for a police drug dog to sniff your car?
I’m glad to see the precedent set now, because in another few years the police will be able to fly a humming bird size drone complete with microphone, infrared, thermal and night vision camera right up to your windows and watch what your doing.
IMHO the ruling was too narrow. They should have ruled that it isn't only illegal for a police dog to sniff your porch but to hump your leg as well..........
SCOTUS ping.
