The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a 2010 Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on the propriety of strip searches for minor offenses in an April 2 decision.
The case, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington, dealt with the strip search of a man on a minor traffic offense, finding that such searches were okay under the law.
Albert Florence brought the case. Seven years ago he was arrested during a traffic stop and was mistakenly charged with contempt of court for failure to pay a fine. He was erroneously held in jail for one week, despite the fact that the fine had been paid.
During the course of his detention, he was subject to two strip searches. While New Jersey law mandates that all state prison inmates can be strip-searched, county jails only allow strip searches for violent criminals or those charged with serious offenses, reports the Inquirer.
But these weren’t just strip searches for contraband. Florence, a finance manager at a car dealership, was subject to a degrading strip search for disease, tattoos and scars as well.
In the dissent, however, the four liberal justices stated that jail strip searches should be limited to those cases where officers have reasonable suspicion. The dissenting justices cited that these searches are “inherently harmful, humiliating and degrading.”
Do the safety and big-picture interests of jails outweigh the Fourth Amendment interests of low-level (or in this case, no-level) offenders?
Related Resources:
- Get
- Ready to Get Naked: SCOTUS Upholds Prison Strip Search (FindLaw’s Supreme
- Court Blog)Florence
- v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington (FindLaw’s 3rd
- Circuit Blog)Search 3rd Circuit
- Cases (FindLaw)
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
