Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg excoriated colleagues on Monday, charging the court with undermining Constitutional safeguards against police abuses.
Justices had that day ruled 5-3 to reverse a Utah Supreme Court decision to suppress evidence collected by a narcotics detective. Elena Kagan was the other Justice to dissent.
The officer in the case had detained a suspect without reasonable suspicion, discovered the man had a warrant for a traffic violation, then placed him under arrest and discovered he was possessing methamphetamine. He was subsequently charged for violating drug laws.
Prosecutors for the state had admitted that the detention leading to the drug bust was illegal, but that it satisfied the “attenuation doctrine.” Under the concept, police misconduct can be overlooked by judges if they determine there was little connection between cop misbehavior and the discovery of evidence.
In an opinion authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the majority said the arrest warrant was an attenuating factor. Sotomayor and Ginsburg disagreed fervently.
“Do not be soothed by the opinion’s technical language,” the pair wrote. “This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants—even if you are doing nothing wrong.”
The justices noted that the warrant justification has wide-reaching implications, with there being “over 7.8 million outstanding warrants” at the state and federal level. Sotomayor and Ginsburg noted most “appear to be for minor offenses.”
Sotomayor’s attack on the ruling went further than Ginsburg’s. The latter only signed onto the first three sections of the remonstrance. In the final section, Sotomayor alone noted how abusive policing in the US typically occurs at the expense of communities of color. She cited journalists Michelle Alexander and Ta-Nehisi Coates in her dissent.
“The white defendant in this case shows that anyone’s dignity can be violated in this manner,” Sotomayor wrote. “But it is no secret that people of color are disproportionate victims of this type of scrutiny.”
“[T]his case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time,” the first Latina Supreme Court justice added. “It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights.”
