The Supreme Court made an interesting ruling yesterday involving a woman who called police to the scene of a domestic dispute and told them where her husband's cocaine was stashed:
The Supreme Court narrowed police search powers yesterday, ruling that officers must have a warrant to look for evidence in a couple's home unless both partners present agree to let them in.
The 5 to 3 decision sparked a sharp exchange among the justices. The majority portrayed the decision as striking a blow for privacy rights and gender equality; dissenters said it could undermine police efforts against domestic violence, the victims of which are often women.
Roberts and Souter squared off in their opinions, which are summarized in the aritcle.
Although I'm generally in favor of limiting police power, both sides make good arguments. It's a tough call, but it seems better to err on the side of caution in cases of domestic violence and abuse. The majority opinion says this discriminates against women and denies their equal rights. Somehow, I don't think it will usually be women objecting to entry in these cases.
What do you think?
- UT dropping "Lady" from "Lady Vols" (24 replies)
- FYI: Don't buy a teenage boy a sports car (36 replies)
- UT discontinues Lady Vols Hall of Fame (6 replies)
- Companies accuse Haslam of leading Pilot Flying J fraud (5 replies)
- VW sets new "Community Organization Engagement" policy at Chattanooga Plant (23 replies)
- BlueCross premium hike (14 replies)
- RIP Mike Nichols (3 replies)
- Local Presbyterian church in turmoil over same-sex marriage (7 replies)
- Snow pics from Buffalo (6 replies)
- Haslam named chair of Republican Governors Association, nobody else wanted it (1 reply)
- Geek tip: Trick out your Android keyboard (1 reply)
- Christmas lights at Chilhowee Park (1 reply)