Given this degradation of the Bill of Rights, it would be pretty cool to put stickers on bus seats, or in bus-stops, reminding people --whether citizens or not, and regardless of their albedo-- of their rights. Of course, this would be considered vandalism. Writing the Bill of Rights was treason at the time, of course. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&ncid=716&e=1&u=/ap/20020617/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_bus_search Supreme Court Rules on Bus Searches Mon Jun 17,12:32 PM ET By GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that police who want to look for drugs or evidence of other crimes do not have to first inform public transportation passengers of their legal rights. The ruling gives police guidance on how to approach and search passengers, a case with renewed interest as officers seek out possible terrorists on public transportation. The case focused on the difference between police questioning on a bus and in a less confining environment, such as a sidewalk. In both instances, police would need permission or probable cause to search someone, but the justices rejected arguments that passengers, confined to small spaces, might feel coerced to go along. The court ruled 6-3 that officers in Tallahassee, Fla., were within their rights as they questioned and searched two men aboard a Greyhound bus in 1999. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the passengers did not have to be told that they didn't have to cooperate. The Bush administration invoked the war on terrorism in asking the Supreme Court to get involved in the case, but the court majority did not specifically refer to that argument. Kennedy did note that public transportation riders understand the risks from potential criminals in their midst. "Bus passengers answer officers' questions and otherwise cooperate not because of coercion, but because the passengers know that their participation enhances their own safety and the safety of those around them," Kennedy wrote. Three officers boarded the bus, bound from Fort Lauderdale to Detroit. One officer introduced himself to Christopher Drayton and Clifton Brown, and told them he was looking for illegal drugs and weapons. He asked to pat down the men's baggy clothing. The men agreed, and officers felt hard objects on the men's legs that turned out to be packets of cocaine. "It is beyond question that had this encounter occurred on the street, it would be constitutional. The fact that an encounter takes place on a bus does not on its own transform standard police questioning of citizens into an illegal seizure," Kennedy wrote for the court. On the street, the person being stopped could simply refuse to cooperate and keep walking. Unless police had good reason to pursue the person further, they would be free to go. Drayton and Brown argued that they did not have the same option while seated on the bus. They were convicted and sentenced on drug charges. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ( news - web sites) ruled the cocaine should not have been admitted as evidence, because the officers failed to tell the men they were not required to cooperate. That court said the encounter violated the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. Monday's ruling overturns that decision. In a dissent, Justice David H. Souter said that three officers "pinned-in" passengers on the stopped bus. "The situation is like the one in the alley, with civilians in close quarters unable to move effectively, being told their cooperation is expected," wrote Souter, who was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens ( news - web sites) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg ( news - web sites). He said because of terrorist concerns, airplane passengers know they must submit to searches. "The commonplace precautions of air travel have not, thus far, been justified for ground transportation," Souter wrote. Donna Shea, legal director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said police will use the ruling as justification for aggressive questioning. "I think police will continue intimidating passengers," she said. The ruling "gives bus passengers a lesser expectation of privacy. I think that's unconstitutional." The case is United States v. Drayton, 01-631.