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?
- Campus facilities management outsourcing announced (5 replies)
- Gannett swings the axe again... (18 replies)
- Safety center advancing (2 replies)
- A robot that burns Donald Trump's tweets (1 reply)
- Trump budget (15 replies)
- Tesla on autopilot hits police motorcycle (1 reply)
- Former FCC chairman: Things are 'going the way I feared' (2 replies)
- Why doesn't Rep. Eddie Smith want to test school drinking water for lead? (18 replies)
- Drum solos that don't suck (2 replies)
- As more Americans fail drug tests, employers turn to refugees (1 reply)
- How Republicans quietly sabotaged Obamacare long before Trump came into office (5 replies)
- Maybe Trump should try single payer? (1 reply)