Bill of Rights vandalism, supremes don't ride busses

[Major Variola (ret)]

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.