I dont pull everybody out of the car that I stop, usually only those that I suspect may be driving under suspension, have warrants etc.
It usually goes along these lines. I stop someone for a violation, I tell them why I'm stopping them and ask for a drivers license. If they give me their license I either write a ticket or give a warning. Soft hearted schmuck that I am, most people whom I think are hard working people who cant afford a ticket, I give a break to and tell them to fix whatever the problem is so they dont have to give a days pay to the city.
But if they dont have a license and I suspect there may be a little more to the picture I ask them to step out. I then search them to make sure they dont have any weapons before I sit them behind me in my cruiser to check to see if everything is in order. If it is I go back to plan A, if not, and there is a warrant or something else, I do what I have to do.
We have to search and inventory peoples vehicles if we arrest them and tow the car.
I dont know many guys who pull everybody out and search their cars on every traffic stop. Not saying someone isnt doing it.
Yesterday in briefing one of the guys said that he wasnt giving any more tickets because too many cops were jumping on him for writing people tickets for 5 over the limit.
In Ohio if you are stopped and dont have your drivers license the officer can arrest you, the charge is "fail to display" (drivers license) Its fashionable for people who have reason to lie (DUS, warrant, etc) to give someone elses drivers info if they are stopped. Its fun to show up for court and look stupid when "the real John Doe" shows up instead of the person who used his ID when stopped and the prosecutor throws the ticket out. Most of the "real John Does" have no idea who used their ID when stopped by the police.
Do you seek or get permission from the owner? Do you obtain a search warrant? Don't you need "probable cause" to get such a warrant?.
Is this also true if you tow a car for a parking violation?
You are correct that the Courts have upheld police's right to do a lot of things which, although IMO are a direct violation of the spirit and letter of the Constitution.
It is also true that a lot of cops do a lot of things which the courts do not allow just because they can get by with it.
I have a friend who is a retired FBI agent. We once were discussing the little town of Ludowici, Georgia. This agent would never use his credentials for personal indentification, for one thing, it is illegal to do so, and it is just not good form. He did do so on one occassion.
He was driving a plain unmarked vehicle, (not a black Crown Vic, with black premium tires, no chrome etc.). He was looking for someone in Ludowici to ask some questions of when he noticed the Ludowici town police take notice of him. Sure enough, after about 10 minutes the local cop pulls him over, and asks, not for his license, but for ID. The agent knows this was his chance. He pulls out his plastic laminated credentials, opens it and says, "did you have probable cause to stop me."
The local about faints on the spot, turns red, stutters and profusely apologizes. The agent decides to cut the guy some slack, after all, he might need the guy's help sometime.