I wonder how many of you remember that funny catch phrase made famous by Flip Wilson and Sammy Davis Jr. on the venerable old comedy show Laugh-In. I figure to have some levity to start off with, because quite frankly what we have is, Here Comes The Judge(s). Five of them to be exact; and U.S. Supreme Court Judges, no less. For those of you who remember the old Laugh-In skit, imagine five people in black robes, donning the curled, powdered wigs, entering the courtroom in comedic fashion. I used to love to watch Laugh-In and this skit in particular, it was just that funny.
So why did we start off today's entry with some levity, because todays entry is like combining that lovable Laugh-In skit with Michael, Freddie and the Exorcist. Five members of the U.S. Supreme Court has decided that if you are arrested, rightfully or wrongly, you can be strip searched. That's right, stripped naked, made to squat and cough, from murder to speeding, to being wrongfully arrested.
In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, et al., No. 10-945, Mr. Florence was arrested by New Jersey police for a bench warrant issued on an unpaid fines. He was riding with his pregnant wife and four year old son when his wife was stopped for speeding. During the traffic stop the warrant was found. The warrant however was a computer error, as Mr. Florence had previously paid the fines, which were entered incorrectly on computer records. The State of New Jersey even admits it made a mistake by failing to purge the arrest warrant.
None of that mattered to the U.S. Supreme Court. It doesn't matter if the arrest is wrongful or not; it doesn't matter if its a minor infraction or murder; if you get arrested for any reason whatsoever, you can be strip-searched. Period.
The five judge majority decried the complications and dangers of jailers and correctional officers to justify "substantial discretion" in dealing with jail issues. As the Court states, "[P]eople detained for minor offenses can turn out to be the most devious and dangerous criminals".
Really?
The Court uses the Oklahoma City Bombing and Timothy McVeigh as an example, saying that after the bombing McVeigh was stopped for driving without a license plate. They also use the example of one of the 9/11 terrorists who was stopped and ticketed for speeding prior to the 9/11 attacks.
What in the world do these examples have to do with strip-searching people?
Would a strip-search of McVeigh have saved the lives of those in the Murrah Building? Obviously not. Would a strip-search have prevented the 9/11 attacks? Obviously not. I would love to know what color the sky is over the supreme court, because it sure isn't blue.
A friend of mine suggested that the court go through a strip search just to see how degrading it is. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea; although I shudder at the visual.
Is there a time and place for a strip search? Sure there is. But for every person arrested, even for minor infractions? This is simply ludicrous.
In a time and climate where the people grow more and more resistant to the encroachment of government and courts to our civil liberties, it is vitally important that the perception of justice and respect for law be a central issue in every constitutional case. As a lawyer who has practiced for 35 years, it has become increasingly difficult to uphold this fine line between order and chaos when the highest court of this land comes out with an opinion that degrades the human being and takes a giant leap to further erode the civil rights that our founding fathers ensured we kept through the Constitution.
This is a horrifying opinion that fosters those beliefs that this nation is no longer a Republic, but a police state.
Contact your legislators, write your local newspapers, comment in blogs, spend the time and show your opinion to rectify this atrocious assault on the Constitution and on our rights which it protects.
