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?
- Swedes confused/angered by Trump remark (5 replies)
- Louisville Point Park Eagle? (1 reply)
- Traffic deaths expected to have hit troubling milestone (1 reply)
- LWV local news media forum (6 replies)
- The Great Backyard Bird Count is underway (4 replies)
- Concerns linger over future of AMSE after land transfer (1 reply)
- McCain Defends a Free Press: ‘That’s How Dictators Get Started’ (2 replies)
- Nearly one-third of TN high schoolers graduated without all course requirements in 2015 (4 replies)
- U.S. House sanctions hunting hibernating bears, wolf pups in their dens (2 replies)
- Trump's Cabinet (101 replies)
- What's Going On? An update about road and greenway projects across Blount County (2 replies)
- NYT: The 'Caddyshack' President (6 replies)
- Feb 22 2017 - 12:00pm (1 day 2 hours from now)
- Feb 23 2017 - 6:00pm (2 days 8 hours from now)
- Feb 27 2017 - 7:00pm (6 days 9 hours from now)