When the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision validated DUI "sobriety checkpoints" (aka police roadblocks), Chief Justice Rehnquist admitted that they were a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. However, he wrote in Michigan v. Sitz, the "minimal intrusion" into citizens’ protected right to privacy was "outweighed" by the government’s interest in reducing DUI-caused fatalities.
Although the decision limited the use of roadblocks to apprehension of drunk drivers, it was not difficult to foresee that police would soon go beyond this. And, in fact, there has been a growing increase in the use of roadblocks for purposes other than DUI detection. See, for example, my earlier posts Sobriety Checkpoints: The Slippery Slope and The Slow Death of the Fourth Amendment. Or just look around you….
Police Checkpoint Seeks Illegal Guns
Mt. Vernon, NY. Sept. 28 - Drivers entering the city from the Bronx via First Avenue last night encountered the first police checkpoint searching for illegal guns.
Amid flashing lights and flares in the roadway, more than a dozen officers were pulling over every third car to ask for permission to search for guns and check for other crimes such as drunken driving.
Hmmm…..Roadblocks to check for guns "and other crimes" — in other words, stopping you on the highways without probable cause to see if you’re doing anything wrong or have anything illegal in the car. So much for the Fourth Amendment.
But then, you don’t have to give the police your "permission to search", right? Wrong. Does anyone seriously believe that if you refused permission, you would be sent merrily on your way?
(Thanks to David O’Shea.)