This is something I’ve wondered about for a while.
I just got back from dropping my kid off at school. In the school parking lot were two cops, with their car lights flashing. They were stopping everyone as they came in to do a “seat belt check”. Now, I know that in my state (Vermont), cops are allowed to pull people over if they think they don’t have seat belts on, but I’ve never been clear on how it’s legal for cops to stop everyone going by to check for compliance with some law.
This isn’t exactly an egregious example of abuse of police power, but last year there was an incident here that I thought was much more questionable. A roadblock was set up on the freeway - the major traffic artery through this area - which I later found out was being run by the INS. They were stopping cars looking for illegal immigrants. Everyone had to produce a license showing they were US citizens or, if they weren’t citizens, produce papers showing they had a legal right to be in the US. This wasn’t just rumor. My university sent out an email warning all international students to start carrying their papers with them for this reason.
Again - how is this legal? I assume it is, because it’s done all the time, and quite openly, but I don’t get it. People are always making a stink about how cops pull people over for no reason or for really questionable reasons, so how can they just stop everyone for no reason at all?
I think the keyword is “everyone”. If everyone is pulled over, then there is no discrimination. So if there is a real Government interest in the examination, the examination is being done in an evenhanded manner and I believe the courts find that OK.
:eek: I must have missed it when the City of Los Angeles boycotted Vermont. How is the state doing since all of those rock bands won’t perform in Vermont anymore?
And I think you mean ICE, not INS. They changed their name a while back.
These things are constantly being challenged. You are stuck in the middle. Avoid the police if possible. In today’s economy, police are looking for every nuance to make extra money to support the system. Seat belts are perfect for this because it’s the officer’s word against yours and the system always believes the officer, not you. In my area, police are constantly writing bogus tickets for all offenses for the revenue. Many jurisdictions are going to E-tickets where they merely put your license number and the offense code in and it spits out a ticket. You will get no warnings. They can complete a stop in five minutes. Your misery will last for years of increased insurance.
PS. Police don’t want the public to see their actions. Three states have made it illegal to even take a picture of police in public without their prior permission, which they are not giving. These things are in court too, but the trend is clear. Your rights are constantly on the line.
Just to clarify, “…on a federal level…” means that if a state does it, it does not violate the federal constitution. The case linked by BorgHunter, Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, involved a DUI checkpoint run (obviously) by the state police in Michigan.
I greatly dislike roadblocks, and consider them but one factor of the disturbing trend in expanding police stop and search power. But the short answer is that they are legal because courts have pretty consistently held them to be constitutional. Anyone can disagree with the Supremes on just about any issue, but what the Supremes say IS the law.
I have not been keeping track of that situation, but one problem I foresee is that there is no ready way to identify who is and isn’t legal. US citizens are required to carry papers.
Someone would need to challenge the practice, and there would have to be a holding that the stop was in support of a legitimate state interest, and that the personal intrusion were acceptable.
The question has been answered, so I’ll add an anecdote. A few days ago I went through my first police roadblock ever, a DUI operation over memorial day weekend. I never thought to question the legality of it. The police were not discriminating in who they stopped.
All of the Arizona immigration Law opponents and boycotters. The say that the law is a racist law and that all brown-people will be targeted. Well the Federal immigration law uses the same standards, why isn’t the Federal immigration law labeled as a racist law, encouraging racial profiling?
Does it matter if it’s the Arizona State police or the U.S. Border patrol doing the stops with all other issues being the same?
Rhode Island and other states do not allow police ‘roadblocks’ under the State Constitution, and I think clarified through additional legislation. Roadblocks have also been criticized as being ineffective. I’ve never understood how stopping everybody converts an unreasonable search and seizure into a reasonable one.
Is there really that big of a need to have road blocks in Rhode Island? You can drive across the entire state in about 20 minutes. Just put gates at the borders and your job’s done.