Are Roadblocks Constitutional?

[bobbcat]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

 

[L.K.Eder]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

don't let them evil government agents stop you when you drive home from your party drunk. switch off the lights and put the pedal to the metal. you will make it through the roadblocks, probably. live free or die.

 

[lawbuff]

If you are refering to DUI checkpoints, yes they are federally constitutional, Michigan Department of State Police, v. Sitz, and I see no reason states would not uphold them, however, if I remember correctly from doing research some time ago, one state I read has them as violative of thier own constitution.

 

[uscitizen]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

No moreso than the cops blocking roads and such during a big sporting event.

 

[P F Tinmore]

If you are refering to DUI checkpoints, yes they are federally constitutional, Michigan Department of State Police, v. Sitz, and I see no reason states would not uphold them, however, if I remember correctly from doing research some time ago, one state I read has them as violative of thier own constitution.

I say they are unconstitutional. I don't care what the clowns in the robes say.

 

[uscitizen]

Is cops stopping you and letting out traffic from a megachurch constitutional?

 

[uscitizen]

Is cops preventing you from carrying guns on a plane constitutional?

 

[uscitizen]

Is making it illegal to yell fire in a theatre unconstitutional?

 

[HUGGY]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

No moreso than the cops blocking roads and such during a big sporting event.

Being asked to deture around an obstical such as a sporting event is light years from being stopped en masse without probable cause and forced to be tested for substances. Anyone that believes that this is constitutional is an enemy of our countries foundational instruments. This is not the former soviet union sport. If you concede that this is a police state then perhaps it is high time to start nourishing our failing freedom with the blood of tyrants.

 

[lawbuff]

Being asked to deture around an obstical such as a sporting event is light years from being stopped en masse without probable cause and forced to be tested for substances. Anyone that believes that this is constitutional is an enemy of our countries foundational instruments.

Once stopped, the intrusion MUST be minimal. If detained further without at least a reasonable suspicion they are DUI, or some other articulable reason, then the detention turns into an UNreasonable seizure under the 4th.

Once stopped it is evident facially in most cases if the person is supected of DUI, then a further detention is warranted. If all is kosher, they can not detain any longer.

On another note, drug interdiction checkpoints are Unconstituional, however, in some states, including mine, Driver's License checkpoints are. The SC even ruled it does not trigger 4th AM scrutiny if vehicles are stopped in a given neighborhood where a major felony occurred to ask motorists if they saw or heard anything at the time of commission.

 

[lawbuff]

Is making it illegal to yell fire in a theatre unconstitutional?

Such words are already illegal, in any state, as they pose a "clear and present danger" to the public's safety and are not 1st AM protected.

 

[uscitizen]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

No moreso than the cops blocking roads and such during a big sporting event.

Being asked to deture around an obstical such as a sporting event is light years from being stopped en masse without probable cause and forced to be tested for substances. Anyone that believes that this is constitutional is an enemy of our countries foundational instruments. This is not the former soviet union sport. If you concede that this is a police state then perhaps it is high time to start nourishing our failing freedom with the blood of tyrants.

They both use the same excuse. Public safety.

If you are not doing something wrong why worry?

 

[manifold]

In my home town growing up there was a dickless tracy that used park her cruiser hidden in the woods just outside of a D.A.V. hall and stop every car the left the parking lot.

Is that constitutional?

I also went to a party once with a bunch of buddies up to UNH (none of us went there but we know some people who did). The party was at a house on a dead-end street. Instead of breaking the party up, the cops stopped every car that tried to leave. Lucky for us we had a sober designated driver. But the cops still put him through all the paces and seemed genuinely pissed off that he wasn't drunk.

Is that constitutional?

 

[uscitizen]

In my home town growing up there was a dickless tracy that used park her cruiser hidden in the woods just outside of a D.A.V. hall and stop every car the left the parking lot.

Is that constitutional?

I also went to a party once with a bunch of buddies up to UNH (none of us went there but we know some people who did). The party was at a house on a dead-end street. Instead of breaking the party up, the cops stopped every car that tried to leave. Lucky for us we had a sober designated driver. But the cops still put him through all the paces and seemed genuinely pissed off that he wasn't drunk.

Is that constitutional?

Well let me ask you this.
Should cops keep an eye on a MAMBLA (sp?) headquarters for pedophiles?

Same deal, if the business generates drunks then it is a good idea to keep an eye on those leaving to keep the roads safer.

 

[Navy1960]

Mapp v. Ohio,

The ignoble shortcut to conviction left open to the State tends to destroy the entire system of constitutional restraints on which the liberties of the people rest. [n11] Having once recognized that the right to privacy embodied in the Fourth Amendment is enforceable against the States, and that the right to be secure against rude invasions of privacy by state officers is, therefore, constitutional in origin, we can no longer permit that right to remain an empty promise. Because it is enforceable in the same manner and to like effect as other basic rights secured by the Due Process Clause, we can no longer permit it to be revocable at the whim of any police officer who, in the name of law enforcement itself, chooses to suspend its enjoyment. Our decision, founded on reason and truth, gives to the individual no more than that which the Constitution guarantees him, to the police officer no less than that to which honest law enforcement is entitled, and, to the courts, that judicial integrity so necessary in the true administration of justice

Mapp v. Ohio

Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz


Petitioners concede, correctly in our view, that a Fourth Amendment "seizure" occurs when a vehicle is stopped at a checkpoint. Tr. of Oral Arg. 11; see Martinez-Fuerte, supra, at 556 ("It is agreed that checkpoint stops are ‘seizures' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment"); Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593, 597 (1989) (Fourth Amendment seizure occurs "when there is a governmental termination of freedom of movement through means intentionally applied" (emphasis in original)). The question thus becomes whether such seizures are "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment.

It is important to recognize what our inquiry is not about. No allegations are before us of unreasonable treatment of any person after an actual detention at a particular checkpoint. See Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. at 559 ("claim that a particular exercise of discretion in locating or operating a checkpoint is unreasonable is subject to post-stop judicial review"). As pursued in the lower courts, the instant action challenges only the use of sobriety checkpoints generally. We address only the initial stop of each motorist passing through a checkpoint and the associated preliminary questioning and observation [p451] by checkpoint officers. Detention of particular motorists for more extensive field sobriety testing may require satisfaction of an individualized suspicion standard. Id. at 567.
Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz

 

[lawbuff]

Mapp v. Ohio....

If I may, this case concerned the federal exclusionary rule as applicable to the states and answered in the affirmitive, it does not have any bearing on DUI checkpoints as discussed.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Is making it illegal to yell fire in a theatre unconstitutional?

Such words are already illegal, in any state, as they pose a "clear and present danger" to the public's safety and are not 1st AM protected.

I always hated that ruling. Especially, given the circumstances of the case in point, there was a fire, and the theater owner had insured the patrons was trying to collect on the insurance.


Over the years, Holmes has proved to be better literature than constitutional law.

 

[lawbuff]

In my home town growing up there was a dickless tracy that used park her cruiser hidden in the woods just outside of a D.A.V. hall and stop every car the left the parking lot.

Is that constitutional?

No, this is quite different from Sitz.

I also went to a party once with a bunch of buddies up to UNH (none of us went there but we know some people who did). The party was at a house on a dead-end street. Instead of breaking the party up, the cops stopped every car that tried to leave. Lucky for us we had a sober designated driver. But the cops still put him through all the paces and seemed genuinely pissed off that he wasn't drunk.

Is that constitutional?

No!

 

[Contumacious]

If you are refering to DUI checkpoints, yes they are federally constitutional, .

Of course, they are , They are also constitutional in Cuba and similar police states .

The bastards inside the DC beltway have completely obliterated , decimated, annulled the 4th Amendment.

Heil Hitler.

 

[Article 15]

What is their probable cause to stop me?