In the Nazified Big Apple, Fuhrer Bloomberg's policy to "stop and frisk" anybody for any reason is coming under fire. It's about time. The policy is blatantly racist and 90% of those who are stopped and frisked are folks of color according to CNN, here.
Each year, hundreds of thousands of people in New York are stopped, questioned, frisked and searched, often without justification, under the "stop and frisk" policy. The vast majority of these people live in communities of color, and almost 90% are immediately released without arrest or even a summons.But help may be on the way according to The New York Times.
Courts Putting Stop-and-Frisk Policy on Trial
New York City’s accelerating use of police stop-and-frisk tactics has brought a growing chorus of opponents who have been matched in intensity only by the officials who defend the policy. But recent rulings by federal and state courts have now cast judges as the most potent critics of the practice, raising sharp questions about whether the city has sidestepped the Constitution in the drive to keep crime rates low....
Some legal experts say the police could be pushed into reducing the numbers of street stops of New Yorkers by hundreds of thousands a year, and that the proportion of stop-and-frisk subjects who are black and Latino would be sharply reduced.
A settlement last year of a class-action case involving stop-and-frisk policies in Philadelphia laid out a model that, if followed in New York, could call for the courts to supervise an imposed system of police monitoring and accountability.
The courts have been energized to step in, some lawyers say, as the debate has intensified over police tactics that have brought legal challenges, academic analysis and news coverage. “The decisions show that the courts are suspicious of the current police practices,” said Michael C. Dorf, a constitutional law professor at Cornell.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court upheld cavity searches.
Bend Over and Spread Em says the Supreme Court
Regarding the recent 5-4 SCOTUS decision to uphold strip searches, Supreme Court Justice Breyer describes a strip search in his dissent (joined by Kagan, Gingsberg and Sotomayor) as follows:
“‘..a visual inspection of the inmate’s naked body. This should include the inmate opening his mouth and moving his tongue up and down and from side to side, removing any dentures, running his hands through his hair, allowing his ears to be visually examined, lifting his arms to expose his arm pits, lifting his feet to examine the sole, spreading and/or lifting his testicles to expose the area behind them and bending over and/or spreading the cheeks of his buttocks to expose his anus. For females, the procedures are similar except females must in addition, squat to expose the vagina.’”
The Supreme Court has upheld the right of the police to do this to anybody for any reason who has the misfortune of ending up in police custody for any reason, including minor traffic violations. For obviously justifiable reasons, this outrageously insane Supreme Court decision has fired up anger among civil libertarians on all sides of the political ideological spectrum. Pure and simple, it's a rape, it's a sexual assault and it's designed to be as humiliating and degrading as possible. A nation where state sanctioned sexual assault is codified into the law of the land has debauched itself to a level reminiscent of Nazi Germany and the most ruthlessly oppressive totalitarian regimes ever to exist.
America used to be a place where a search couldn't be conducted without a valid warrant and a warrant couldn't be obtained without sufficient probable cause. But the era of protected civil liberties are long gone in America.