Several of the justices questioned whether it was reasonable for the North Carolina officer to pull over a car because one of its two brake lights was burned out, even though a quirky state law requires only one light to be functional. The stop led to a search and the discovery of cocaine in the trunk, but the high court's ultimate decision could lead to that evidence being excluded.
Arguments in the case took place shortly after the court announced its surprising decision to turn away appeals from five states seeking to prohibit same-sex marriages, paving the way for an immediate expansion of gay marriage. This group of justices began its fifth year together, and Chief Justice John Roberts is at the start of his 10th year at the head of the high court. On tap for the term is an array of cases involving:
— Religious, employment and housing discrimination;
— The drawing of political districts in Alabama and Arizona;
— A dispute between Congress and the president over passports that is heavy with Middle East politics;
— The use of a law to prevent document shredding against a fisherman accused of throwing undersized red grouper overboard; and
— The prosecution of a self-styled rapper whose Facebook postings threatened his estranged wife, an FBI agent and area schools.
Monday's argument on the police action involves an appeal by Nicholas Heien, whose Ford Escort was pulled over when an officer saw that the right rear brake light wasn't working. The officer found cocaine during an ensuing search, and Heien was later convicted of drug trafficking. The case tests whether the officer's mistaken understanding of the law makes the traffic stop unreasonable and the search a violation of Heien's constitutional rights. A divided state Supreme Court said the mistake was reasonable enough to justify the routine traffic stop and refused to toss out the drug evidence.
MORE
