SCOTUS Okays Illegal Evidence

Police may now use illegally obtained evidence in court.
Source: Brett Levin / Flickr

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor does not want the United States to turn into a prison state, but that’s exactly what she fears is happening. She was joined by Justices Elana Kagen and Ruth Bader Ginsberg in her dissent following the 5-3 vote on Utah v. Strieff, a case concerning unreasonable search and seizure and “reasonable suspicion.”

The Utah State Supreme Court had ruled that police couldn’t present evidence against defendants that had been illegally obtained, but the United States Supreme Court reversed that ruling. Here's an example of what this could mean for the everyday American: if an officer pulled somebody over for speeding, then decided to search that car because they had a “reasonable suspicion” that the driver had drugs or weapons or something in the car, then that could be used against the driver in court. 

Without actual evidence that the driver is up to something, a cop shouldn’t be able to search their car--as this could lead to unfair treatment and a myriad other issues. But this new ruling essentially says that cops can do whatever they want, then justify it after the fact.

This is, as you can probably tell, not a good precedent--especially given the current climate of hostility surrounding police officers and the Black Lives Matter movement. 

Even this hypothetical driver was transporting drugs or the like, police have no right to search the vehicle without probably cause. But it also gives them carte blanche to search and harass whomever they want, whenever they want. How would you feel if you were pulled over for speeding and then subjected to a full search of your car? Whether or not you had anything illegal is beside the point--this new freedom for cops could potentially mean huge privacy violations and harassment.

Though this certainly isn't something all police officers would use in a consciously malicious way, this ruling puts the law behind racist or sexist cops who harass citizens because they’re a person of color, a woman, a transgendered person, or any other designation they are uncomfortable with. Cops can decide that a driver or a jaywalker being Muslim is reason to search their vehicle or their person, find something to arrest them for, hope they resist that arrest, or even give them a reason to assault that person.

Police power is a carful balancing act, which often tips against the people, as we’ve seen time and time again in the last few years--and a ruling like this only takes more power away from individual citizens and gives more to the establishment, for moral or immoral ends.