Strip Searches Allowed For Any Offense Rules Supreme Court

Strip searching is now being allowed for any offense for which you are arrested for, no matter how minor. The Supreme Court ruled Monday by a 5 to 4 vote that officials would now have the right to strip search any individual arrested for any offense before admitting them to jails, even if they have no reason to suspect any presence of contraband reported The New York Times.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, along with the conservative wing, wrote that:

” Courts are in no position to second guess the judgments of correctional officials who must consider not only the possibility of smuggled weapons and drugs but also public health and information about gang affiliations. Every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be required to undergo a close visual inspection while undressed.”

The opinions of both sides agreed that the search procedure the decision would allow (close inspection by a guard while completely naked) were more intrusive than being monitored while showering, but did not involve any physical contact.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer, writing for the four who oppose stated the strip searches were ” a serious affront to human dignity and to individual privacy. ” Breyer added that strip searches of those arrested for minor offenses should not be permitted without a reasonable suspicion that they were carrying contraband.

According to briefs submitted to the Supreme Court, people have been subjected to the humiliation of a visual strip search after being arrested for driving with a noisy muffler, failing to use a turn signal and riding a bicycle without an audible bell. Even a nun was strip searched during an antiwar demonstration, as were victims of sexual assaults and women who were menstruating.

Justice Kennedy however, responded by saying that “people detained for minor offenses can turn out to be the most devious and dangerous criminals,” noting that Timothy McVeigh was first arrested for driving without a license plate and that one of the terrorists involved with the 9-11 attacks was ticketed for speeding just two days prior to hijacking Flight 93.

The case arose by a New Jersey man, Albert W. Florence, who was arrested in 2005. Florence was a passenger in his wife’s BMW when a state trooper pulled her over for speeding. A records search revealed an outstanding warrant for Mr. Florence based on an unpaid fine, which turned out to have already been paid and incorrect in their system.

Florence ended up being held for a week in two different jails and strip searched in each one.

Chief Justice Roberts said that exceptions to Monday’s Supreme Court ruling were still possible “to ensure that we not embarrass the future.”

[iframe src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/4tBmWd0VXnI” width=”560″ height=”315″]