SCOTUS Rules in Favor of Dogs

[kludge]

We don't need no stinking 4th and 6th Amendments!

Did I really scoop Kirk?

Supreme Court rules in favor of drug-sniffing dog

Supreme Court sides with drug-sniffing dog - The Washington Post

 

[IndyDave1776]

Police "have every incentive to train the dog well," said Justice Antonin Scalia,

"These dogs are quite reliable," agreed Joseph Palmore, representing the U.S. Justice Department, which sided with the state.

This is really rich. Scalia is correct. The police do have every incentive to train their dogs well--they eliminate so much hassle bothering with due process when traveling with a writ of assistance on a leash.

Mr. Palmore seems to make a fool of himself by arguing the reliability of the dogs when the point at issue is that the dog incorrectly indicated and the subsequent search yielded substances that cannot be sniffed by a dog, yet he argues the dog's reliability. I suppose the dog is reliable in the sense of being a reliable end run around due process.

 

[miguel]

Since dogs can't read the Constitution, I guess they get a pass?

 

[rambone]

SCOTUS Approves Search Warrants Issued by Dogs - Hit & Run : Reason.com

 

[mrjarrell]

This really shouldn't have come as a surprise, given their previous rulings where the police are concerned. They give them whatever they want.

 

[Project972]

there you go again, picking on leos.

 

[IndyDave1776]

there you go again, picking on leos.

Would you care to explain to us the problem our founders had with the use of the writ of assistance? If you understand the concept, you would have to see that the same problem exists with these dogs which have such spotty reliability as to almost certainly alerting on cue rather than on actually smelling anything. The Fourth Amendment is in the Constitution for a reason.