First, if you look at my posts I am about as far from a leftist as there is. Second, I know very well was a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion is and one is not needed to instruct passengers to disembark from a stopped vehicle. All that is needed is a reasonable perception of danger to an officer's safety. IF an officer has the driver out of the vehicle, he can't supervise the passenger if he is IN the vehicle. Ordering the passenger to disembark is both legal and smart. Here is an explanation of the case law to prove you are wrong as usual:
"
The US Supreme Court started giving guidance on this issue in
Maryland v. Wilson, 519 US 408 (1997). This case is the sister case to
Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 US 106 (1977). The Court in the Mimms case held that an officer can order the driver out of his vehicle for officer safety reasons. The Wilson case gave the officer equal control over the passenger. The passenger can be ordered from the vehicle and kept out until the completion of the traffic stop. The Court recognized that passengers in a vehicle stopped on traffic increases the danger to the officer. For safety reasons the officer is allowed to control the movement of the passengers. A passenger is already seized for 4th Amendment purposes because of the traffic stop. The controlling of movement by ordering the passenger back into the vehicle, or out of the vehicle, or to sit on the curb are all minimal additional intrusions. Weighing this against the officer’s safety, the Court held that the intrusion was reasonable. If the passenger is already seized by virtue of the traffic stop, the officer does not need further reasonable suspicion under Terry to control the movement of that person. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals held in the Oklahoma case of
US v. Barnes, 156 F.3d 1244 (1998) that a passenger in a vehicle can be detained, ordered from the vehicle, and made to stand by a fence for the officer's safety, the passenger's safety, and to minimize distraction to the dog during a sniff of the vehicle. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held in
US v. Williams, 419 F.3d 1029 (2005) that the officer can order a passenger in a vehicle, who was trying to exit and leave a traffic stop, back into the vehicle. “Allowing a passenger, or passengers, to wander freely about while a lone officer conducts a traffic stop presents a dangerous situation by splitting the officer’s attention between two or more individuals, and enabling the driver and/or the passenger(s) to take advantage of a distracted officer.” The need for the officer’s safety and ability to exercise control over the occupants in a vehicle stopped on traffic outweigh the minimal intrusion into the passenger’s liberty. Finally, in
Arizona V. Johnson, 000 US 07–1122 (2009), the United States Supreme Court held that, ""A reasonable passenger would understand that during the time a car is lawfully stopped, he or she is not free to terminate the encounter with the police and move about at will."
Police officers have the authority during lawful traffic stops to control all occupants of the vehicle. The officer can prevent passengers from exiting and leaving the scene. The officer can make a passenger get out of the vehicle, sit on the curb, stand by a fence, or follow any other reasonable request to ensure the officer's and passenger's safety. The officer's authority to control the occupants of a stopped vehicle ends when the officer no longer needs to control the scene and advises the occupants they are free to leave."
So put that in your pipe and smoke it.
