On that we absolutely agree. However since the pretext for the stop was not legal, anything arising from it was tainted. The court seems to be unaware of the term "testilying".
“However since the pretext for the stop was not legal, anything arising from it was tainted.”
Ah yes, the ‘tainted fruit’ theory that conservatives used to get upset about instead of endorsing.
If the stop was for what a reasonable person could conclude was justified, then illegal activity it uncovers is not tainted.
“Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, and Kagan, JJ., joined.”
When the only justice who agrees with you is Sotomayor, you are in pee-poor legal company!