Unreasonable Search and Seize Is Longer Guaranteed by the 4th Amendment

See additional comments on Tea Party Nation

The 4th Amendment of the Constitution

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling allowing a jailer to perform bodily strip searches on anyone brought into a holding cell. Period. Irregardless of the charge. Once again the media is silent along with our presidential hopefuls concerning another successful attack on the rights of the people. This ruling, in conjunction with the expanded powers of the government to arrest anyone based on a suspicion of being a terrorist (otherwise known as a patriot who still believes in the Constitution), should wrap up any opposition to what was left of the law.

At some point, we have to make a judgment based on natural laws guaranteed to us by our Creator and act on the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence. Since we still are under the impression that we live in a Republic based on the rule of law, we tend to hope that change will be temporary and our freedom restored. I would like to propose that a line in the sand be drawn based on what conditions will be imposed that will not be acceptable. Such as the NDAA (part of the Intolerable Acts), this legislation, 450 million rounds of hollow point 40 caliber ammunition for the Department of Homeland Security or any one of the latest executive orders by the president. If we draw the line in the sand based on our own personal convictions, any American patriot would have to declare “I WILL NOT COMPLY“.

David DeGerolamo

Supreme Court Undercuts 4th Amendment Protections-Again

In yet another 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court, the conservatives sitting on the Roberts Court have cut deeply into our protection from unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed to Americans by the 4th Amendment to the Constitution.

As a result of today’s ruling [April 2, 2012], jailers can now perform bodily strip searches on anyone brought in to a holding cell, no matter how minor the alleged infraction. And when I say ‘minor’, I’m not talking about people arrested and held for violent or even misdemeanor drug related crimes.

I’m talking about individuals arrested for riding a bicycle without an audible bell, driving a car with a noisy muffler or failing to properly use a signal when making a left or right turn.


These are but a few of the offenses that were committed by people who found themselves being strip-searched and subject to the long arm of the law when that long arm intruded into personal spaces where no arm was intended to go. These were also the offenses represented in a class action brought against two New Jersey jails by Albert Florence, a New Jersey resident who was also subjected to the humiliation of a strip search—twice— for what the police believed was an outstanding warrant for failing to pay a court fine.

Florence’s ordeal began on a day in 2005 while he and his family were on his way to his mother-in-law’s home to celebrate the purchase of a new residence for the Florence family. Mrs. Florence was at the wheel of the family BMW when she was pulled over for speeding. When the police officer ran a check on Mr. Florence as the owner of the car (despite the fact that he wasn’t driving), they discovered that he had an outstanding warrant for failing to pay a fine to the Court.

Never mind that Mr. Florence, a financial executive with an automobile dealership, had, in fact, paid the fine and actually had proof of having done so in the glove box of his automobile because he feared that local police were suspicious of black men who drive nice cars. And never mind that even if the warrant had been an outstanding bench order, not paying a court fine in New Jersey is not a crime.

Florence was arrested and handcuffed as his pregnant wife and young son watched in distress.

When Mr. Florence arrived at the local jail where he was to be held pending a hearing on the warrant, he was subjected to a strip-search. And when he was transferred to a different county jail he was treated to a search of his body once again, despite the fact that, at no time since his first strip-search, was he outside the custody of the police.

During his first strip-search, Florence was forced to disrobe in front of an officer and told to lift his genitals. Upon arriving at the second jail, he was made to squat and cough in front of a number of viewers for the purpose of expelling anything that might be hidden in a body cavity.


Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Civil Unrest, Editorial and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
1 Comment
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] Unreasonable Search and Seize Is Longer Guaranteed by the 4th Amendment […]