Washington (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that police officers have leeway to frisk a passenger in a car stopped for a traffic violation even if nothing indicates the passenger has committed a crime or is about to do so.Immediately, the decision is reasonable. However, because the police are in contact with criminals and criminal behavior everyday, everyone outside of their immediate family are suspect. Reasonable suspicion ceases to be relative to normal behavior as normal behavior, by definition, becomes suspicious, therefore, criminal behavior.
The court on Monday unanimously overruled an Arizona appeals court that threw out evidence found during such an encounter.
The case involved a 2002 pat-down search of an Eloy, Ariz., man by an Oro Valley police officer, who found a gun and marijuana.
The justices accepted Arizona's argument that traffic stops are inherently dangerous for police and that pat-downs are permissible when an officer has a reasonable suspicion that the passenger may be armed and dangerous.
The pat-down is allowed if the police "harbor reasonable suspicion that a person subjected to the frisk is armed, and therefore dangerous to the safety of the police and public," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.
Is frisking for jaywalking next. Or, is that a strip search offense? Good work, SCOTUS.
The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.