Supreme Court upholds strip searches at jails

[mindyrbusiness]

The cops here in Canada also vigorously defend the right to strip searches even for minor offenses.

Published April 02, 2012
Associated Press


WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has ruled that jailers may subject people arrested for minor offenses to invasive strip searches, siding with security needs over privacy rights.

By a 5-4 vote Monday, the court ruled against a New Jersey man who complained that strip searches in two county jails violated his civil rights.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion for the court's conservative justices that when people are going to be put into the general jail population, "courts must defer to the judgment of correctional officials unless the record contains substantial evidence showing their policies are an unnecessary or unjustified response to problems of jail security."

In a dissenting opinion joined by the court's liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer said strip searches improperly "subject those arrested for minor offenses to serious invasions of their personal privacy."

Albert Florence was forced to undress and submit to strip searches following his arrest on a warrant for an unpaid fine, though the fine actually had been paid. Even if the warrant had been valid, failure to pay a fine is not a crime in New Jersey.

But Kennedy focused on the fact that Florence was held with other inmates in the general population. In concurring opinions, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito said the decision left open the possibility of an exception to the rule and might not apply to someone held apart from other inmates.

The first strip search of Florence took place in the Burlington County Jail in southern New Jersey. Six days later, Florence had not received a hearing and remained in custody. Transferred to another county jail in Newark, he was strip-searched again.

The next day, a judge dismissed all charges. Florence's lawsuit soon followed.

He may still pursue other claims, including that he never should have been arrested.

Florence's problems arose in March 2005, as he was heading to dinner at his mother-in-law's house with his pregnant wife and 4-year-old child. His wife, April, was driving when a state trooper stopped the family SUV on a New Jersey highway.

Florence identified himself as the vehicle's owner and the trooper, checking records, found an outstanding warrant for an unpaid fine. Florence, who is African-American, had been stopped several times before, and he carried a letter to the effect that the fine, for fleeing a traffic stop several years earlier, had been paid.

His protest was in vain, however, and the trooper handcuffed him and hauled him off to jail. At the time, the State Police were operating under a court order, spawned by allegations of past racial discrimination, that provided federal monitors to assess state police stops of minority drivers. But the propriety of the stop is not at issue, and Florence is not alleging racial discrimination.

In 1979, the Supreme Court upheld a blanket policy of conducting body cavity searches of prisoners who had had contact with visitors on the basis that the interaction with outsiders created the possibility that some prisoners got hold of something they shouldn't have.

For the next 30 or so years, appeals courts applying the high court ruling held uniformly that strip searches without suspicion violated the Constitution.

But since 2008 -- and in the first appellate rulings on the issue since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- appeals courts in Atlanta, Philadelphia and San Francisco decided that authorities' need to maintain security justified a wide-ranging search policy, no matter the reason for someone's detention.

The high court upheld the ruling from the Philadelphia court, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The case is Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, 10-945.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04 ... z1qug6Nl72

[Ogopogo]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... band_.html


How To Conduct a Strip-Search
A top-to-bottom guide.

By Forrest Wickman|Posted Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 6:37 PM ET

Someone being strip searched.
The Supreme Court has ruled that law enforcement may strip-search a suspect in custody for any crime

Photograph by Stephan Gladieu/Getty Images.

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that officials can strip-search suspects for any arrest, however minor the offense, before admitting them to jail—even if there’s no reasonable suspicion that the individual has contraband. What’s the proper way to conduct a strip-search?

Start at the top and work your way down. Policies regarding the proper time and place for a strip-search vary from state to state and facility to facility, but they all prescribe the same basic procedure. The security officer takes the person to be strip-searched to a private place, asks him to remove his clothes, and then inspects each garment, one at a time, running fingers over any seams to make sure nothing has been sewn inside. Once the subject is naked, the search proceeds from top to bottom and front to back, with the officer giving instructions on what to do. First, he orders the subject to run his hands vigorously through his own hair, to show there’s nothing hidden on his scalp. Then he tells the subject to pull his ears forward and turn his head, to show there’s nothing tucked behind them. Next, he instructs the subject to tilt back his head to reveal the nostrils, and roll his tongue around in his mouth. He might also ask the subject to pull his lips away from his gums, and lift his arms to show there’s nothing in his armpits.

Then on to the torso and lower body. Female strip-search subjects are asked to lift up their breasts and open their legs. Men lift up their penises and scrotums, and, if they’re uncircumcised*, they pull back their foreskins. At this point the guard tells the subject to turn around, so they can start again at the top. Now the subject has to ruffle the back of his hair, and bend over with legs spread. The guard might say, “squat and cough,” with the aim of dislodging an object stored in the rectum or vagina. The strip-search ends with the subject’s being asked to show the bottoms of his feet.
Advertisement

It sounds like a lot, but with a normal, cooperative subject the procedure shouldn’t take more than about five minutes. A suspect with dreadlocks can be more difficult to search, since the hair-ruffling technique isn’t quite as straightforward. Those who are wheelchair-bound also pose special problems. Those who absolutely refuse to follow instructions, and whom the officer suspects of concealing contraband, may be tied down to a gurney.

To be clear, a strip-search is different from the more invasive “body cavity search,” which has an officer inserting his hand into the subject and is generally performed only as a last resort. If an individual is suspected of concealing contraband in his or her rectum, and a standard strip-search turns up nothing, there are a few different ways the officers may proceed. One option is to keep a suspect in isolation to see if he or she eventually excretes some unauthorized material. Another makes use of something called a “Body Orifice Security Scanner,” which works something like a metal detector for your nether parts.

Different kinds of security personnel learn how to conduct strip-searches in different ways. Federal corrections officers study and memorize the procedure at the Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga. After learning the basics as part of their three-week classroom training, they practice on mannequins or on other trainees (who remain fully clothed).

Got a question about today’s news? Ask the Explainer.

Explainer thanks Chris Burke of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and James B. Wells of Eastern Kentucky University.

Correction, April 4, 2012: A typo in the original article said "circumsized" instead of "uncircumsized." (Return to the corrected sentence.)

[smallLliberal]

Typical Republican move.

endless talk of freedom and liberty ... then they want to stick a finger in your butt for no good reason

[RedDog]

No worries. If authorities don't strip search, the other inmates will do it. One big happy family inside where no hole goes unprobed. LOL

[smallLliberal]

No worries. If authorities don't strip search, the other inmates will do it. One big happy family inside where no hole goes unprobed. LOL

From what I read, this means they will be able to strip you for getting a small traffic ticket... or any kind of infraction.

So you dont even need to be booked into a jail.

All thanks to the conservative dickheads on the US Supreme Court.

[mindyrbusiness]

Sadly this is in Canada too if you are taken into police custody for any reason a strip search will be done.

[smallLliberal]

Sadly this is in Canada too if you are taken into police custody for any reason a strip search will be done.

Again... this is not about custody. A speeding ticket, j-walking ticket etc.

[pirapoi]

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

“Every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be required to undergo a close visual inspection while undressed,” Justice Kennedy wrote, adding that about 13 million people are admitted each year to the nation’s jails.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/us/justices-approve-strip-searches-for-any-offense.html?pagewanted=all

[smallLliberal]

just more liberty lost to the failed war on drugs

[WestViking]

just more liberty lost to the failed war on drugs

The thread is not about potheads. Trying to hijack another thread?

[smallLliberal]

just more liberty lost to the failed war on drugs

The thread is not about potheads. Trying to hijack another thread?

what do you think they will be searching for WV?

[WestViking]

just more liberty lost to the failed war on drugs

The thread is not about potheads. Trying to hijack another thread?

what do you think they will be searching for WV?

Shivs, razor bades, currency, handcuff keys, knives, boxcutters, gold and silver amulets, jewelry. pills and other things that can be used as weapons or have a high value in jails or prisons.

[mindyrbusiness]

West Viking is absolutely correct.In the late 90's I was a member of a police liaison committee and we discussed strip searching everyone take into custody. The cops vigorously defended their right to strip searches for weapons and drugs. By the way Jean Chretien was Canadian PM and Bill Clinton was the US President so its not just Republicans or Conservatives behind this intrusion.