HIGH COURT EXAMINES SEARCHES

WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court justices stepped into the public arena
yesterday for what is shaping up as a months-long review of the legality of
aggressive police tactics in the war on drugs.

The review, an examination of whether citizens' rights against unlawful
search or seizure are being violated by law enforcement efforts, focused
yesterday on the Indianapolis Police Department's practice of setting up
random roadblocks where drug-sniffing dogs circle a stopped vehicle while
an officer checks the driver's license and registration.

In an hour of oral arguments, justices peppered lawyers on both sides of
the issue with pointed questions and hypothetical examples about the
program, which the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled last
year violated the Constitution's Fourth Amendment.

Today, the justices will hear arguments on a South Carolina case
challenging a public hospital's practice of informing police about pregnant
women who test positive for illegal drugs.

And before year's end the justices will examine two other Fourth Amendment
cases. In Ore on, the question is whether police without search warrants
can legally employ heat sensors to detect high-intensity lights commonly
used to grow marijuana indoors. In Illinois, the question is whether police
could legally keep a man from entering his own home while they obtained a
warrant to search it.

The cases add up to a comprehensive review of police practices widely used
in the war against drugs. At issue is whether the high court will extend
prior rulings that permit random roadblocks to detect drunken drivers or
intercept undocumented migrants.

As Scott Chinn, the lawyer representing Indianapolis, defended the
constitutionality of the drug checkpoints, Justice Antonin Scalia pointedly
asked: "So you think the government could simply stop the car and say, 'Can
I see your papers, please?' "

"Sorta scary, isn't it?" Scalia added.

Justices David Souter and Stephen Breyer raised the specter of dogs being
deployed to sniff people stopped at pedestrian checkpoints.

Patricia Millett, a Justice Department lawyer who argued in support of
Indianapolis, responded that stopping cars was different because the
vehicles and their drivers are regulated for safety.

Kenneth Falk of the American Civil Liberties Union said roadblocks to
search for drugs will open the way for "ever-increasing intrusions" with
seizures on the streets.