Search Results: scalia (5)


It isn’t every day that a relatively minor pot bust case makes it all the way to the United States Supreme Court, but on Tuesday the highest court in the land heard and decided on just such a case. Obviously, the implications behind it were much larger than the measly four bags of weed confiscated during a California highway traffic stop way back in 2008.

Wikipedia

The United States Supreme Court is considering whether police must get a warrant before ordering a blood test on an unwilling DUI suspect. The case has potentially major ramifications in Washington state, where voters in November approved a marijuana legalization scheme which institutes a strict five nanograms per milliliter (5 ng/ml) blood level for THC, above which drivers are automatically considered impaired.

The justices on Wednesday heard arguments in a case involving a disputed blood test from Missouri, reports The Associated Press. After stopping a speeding, erratically driving car, the driver — who had two previous drunken-driving convictions — refused to submit to a breath test to measure the alcohol in his body.

Commentopia

Big Victory: Obama Administration Dealt Stinging, Unanimous Rebuke By High Court

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday that law enforcement authorities need a probable-cause warrant from a judge to affix a GPS device to a vehicle and monitor its movements.

The decision [PDF] in what is likely the biggest Fourth Amendment case in the computer age rejected the Obama Administration’s position that American citizens have no right to privacy in their public movements, reports David Kravets at Wired.

Washington City Paper

​The United States Supreme Court will decide whether law enforcement should have obtained a search warrant before placing a global positioning system (GPS) tracking device on the car of a Washington, D.C., man who was suspected of dealing drugs, so they could covertly track his movements.

The justices on Tuesday heard oral arguments in an appeal from the Obama Administration, which wants the power to track suspects’ movements without getting a warrant, reports Bill Mears at CNN.
A majority of the justices appeared adamant after a one-hour public session that police officers should have gotten a warrant before placing the device on the subject’s vehicle, Mears reports. A government lawyer didn’t help the Feds’ case when he suggested that such surveillance could be used on members of the Court itself.

Photo: britannica.com/Salem News

​Can Police Can Kick Down Your Door If They Smell Pot? Some Justices Think So

Police smelling marijuana coming from behind an apartment door can enter the home without a warrant if they believe the evidence is being destroyed, some U.S. Supreme Court Justices said on Wednesday.
More than 60 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police couldn’t enter a residence without a warrant just because they smelled burning opium, reports Adam Liptak at The New York Times.
On Wednesday, during the argument of a case about what police were entitled to do upon smelling marijuana outside the door of a Kentucky apartment, two justices were concerned that the Court may be ready to eviscerate the 1948 ruling which stemmed from a Seattle case.