Starting in August 1998 the police in Indianapolis, Indiana, officially began setting up roadway checkpoints, especially in "high-crime areas." At least six times that year, some 30 cops were stationed at each checkpoint, where they would pull over cars in sequence and demand to see a driver's license and registration, and then a specially trained dog would be led around the car in order to sniff for drugs. During a three-month period there were 1,161 police stops and 104 arrests. Fifty-five were on drug charges.

Two individuals, James Edmond and Joell Palmer, after being subjected to such treatment in September 1998, filed a lawsuit demanding a halt to these roadblocks on Fourth Amendment grounds. The case was backed by the American Civil Liberties Union. A trial court rejected the plaintiffs' claim, but a U.S. appeals court last year declared the police tactic unconstitutional. The Supreme Court then upheld the appellate court ruling.

"We cannot sanction stops justified only by the generalized and ever-present possibility that interrogation and inspection may reveal that any given motorist has committed some crime," wrote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor for the majority of the court. If roadblocks were permitted, "there would be little check on the authorities' ability to construct roadblocks for almost any conceivable law enforcement purpose."

She added, "Without drawing the line at roadblocks designed primarily to serve the general interest in crime control, the Fourth Amendment would do little to prevent such intrusions from becoming a routine part of American life."

Previous court rulings, however, have backed the use of such highway checkpoints by the police for other purposes, whittling away Fourth Amendment protections for individuals, especially when in their cars.

In 1976, the Supreme Court declared that roadblocks set up to intercept undocumented workers were constitutional. In 1990, the court held that police can also set up drunk-driving checkpoints on city streets. In 1983, the court backed the use of trained dogs to sniff travelers' luggage to see if they contain any narcotics. In 1999, however, the court ruled that immigration cops violated bus passenger privacy rights by squeezing the luggage in overhead racks in search of drugs.

In a dissenting opinion supported by judges Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice William Rehnquist asked why cities that set up roadblocks for sobriety checks and driver's license examinations could not do drug searches as well. "Why can't the city have a multipurpose stop?" he wrote.

In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, the National League of Cities stated that a number of other city governments were ready to adopt the Indianapolis checkpoint system if the court were to uphold it.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home