When the Supreme Court ruled that check points were constitutional they also set-up rules about them. Now I believe that this in its self was in fact, un-constitutional, much like Rowe vs. Wade in that the court at this point created legislation which it doesn’t have the power to do. If you remember the check point decision went thru at the same time the second flag burning decision (for the second time within a year ???) and that got all the media attention… But the thing is this, usually with a good lawyer, it is found that these check-points are not run by the standards set by the court, and the offender that has the resources to hire good legal representation will get the case dismissed. But here is what gets me. When this happens, why are not all the cases involved with this check point dismissed? Is it because of the revenue these cases bring the state is this another example of how our judicial system treats the poor?
More information about formatting options