Currently in the US in many jurisdictions we have RANDOM traffic stops to check for up to date paperwork and inspections, Intoxication, Seatbelts, drug tafficing, etc.

the 4th Amendment clearly calls for search warrants based on probable cause and supported evidence as well as a limited description of what is to be searched.

How can these random searches be considered constitutional?

Why have they not been struck down in court?

Depends on how one reads the 4th Amendment. If probable cause and a warrant are required to carry out unreasonable searches, then a perfectly robust interpretation is that they are not required to carry out reasonable ones.

The applicability or otherwise of the Amendment therefore hinges on what is or is not unreasonable, and not on the search itself.

Plus, at least in the case of intoxication or seatbelts, most of the symptoms of legal infractions are in plain view - you can see whether or not a driver is wearing a seatbelt through the windows, and you can reasonably suspect intoxication from the way they drive. Anyone daft enough not to buckle up or to drive drunk deserves a little mild rights infringement, IMHO.

If you read these two things separately, then it would appear clear that you are protected from unreasonable search, and that to obtain a search warrant (which IMHO implies a reasonable search if a warrant is issued) there must be probably cause and evidence to support the warrant.



These infractions are in plain view. However, restricting the flow of traffic and stopping vehicles to look inside is clearly intended to improve law enforcements ability to identify these problems, at the expense of all the law abiding citizens that are not violating the law. They examine every vehicle, therefore it is not a specific search.

Look at it from another perspective, using your argument. Would it be OK for law enforcement to require an unobstructed view through your homes windows so that they could walk up to your windows and peer inside to determine if anything illegal is going on? That is essentially what they are doing to motorists.

What if they started coming to everyones house demanding you produce ID and a deed or mortgage paper for the property? They do this to motorist all the time with random safety stops and the like.

EDITED TO ADD:

I think Ben Franklin said it best:

Currently in the US in many jurisdictions we have RANDOM traffic stops to check for up to date paperwork and inspections, Intoxication, Seatbelts, drug tafficing, etc.

the 4th Amendment clearly calls for search warrants based on probable cause and supported evidence as well as a limited description of what is to be searched.

How can these random searches be considered constitutional?

Why have they not been struck down in court?[/QUOTE]

Great discussion Overland, you've touched on something that has needed to be discussed for a long time. To answer your first question-they can't! The only logic that I can see is that by conducting random searches, they *might* catch someone and thus, save more lives. The tautology being: "you want to save lives don't you?" Although it is relevant in it's own way, it isn't a constiutional question, and thus, should be considered irrelevant. In regards to your second question, I would wager that most people who are pulled over at random fail to see it as a threat to their constitutional rights. They see it as something that is "for your own good" and behave like good little sheep and let the officer do his job so that they don't get a (gasp!) ticket. I haven't been pulled over at random over say-labor day weekend or anything like that, though I know it goes on. I live by a community that is notorious for conducting random on the spot checks for license, registration, and vehicle maintenance needs. They must do that when the department is low on cash.

Excellent questions, overlandsailor!

Here in Georgia, we have these random searches also. I tried to track down the actual code section/legislation that allowed it (which usually has a section explaining why the legislation was passed) but could not find it.

I honestly don't understand the justification behind random roadblocks and tend to lean towards the side that says they are illegal for failure to provide probable cause for the search.

I also attempted to find a justification for these searches at the Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety. No suprise, I could not find anything along those lines. Feeling ambitious, I emailed the Director, Bob Dallas, the following email (redacting some personal info of mine):

Not sure if I'll get a response to that, but if I do, you all will be the first to know about it.

Bravo Jaime!! Way to go! The sad thing is that most people are passive about such matters(as I elaborated on above) and won't do a thing about it. If more people took a more pro-active approach as you have done, then perhaps things would be different. Then again, maybe that's what the ACLU is there for.