SUPREME COURT QUESTIONS DRUG ROADBLOCKS BY POLICE

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) questioned
Tuesday whether police may erect roadblocks to catch drug offenders without
violating the privacy rights of innocent motorists, asking if pedestrian
checkpoints might be next.

The high court debated whether to extend its prior rulings, which allow
roadblocks to detect drunk drivers and intercept illegal immigrants being
smuggled across the U.S. border by car, to the routine use of drug
checkpoints.

A. Scott Chinn, representing Indianapolis, defended the constitutionality of
the checkpoints, where police stop all vehicles in an effort to interrupt
the flow of illegal drugs through the city.

At the roadblocks, officers check license and vehicle registrations, examine
motorists for any signs of drug or alcohol impairment and a drug-sniffing
dog walks around the outside of each stopped car to detect illegal
narcotics.

Chinn acknowledged the main reason for the roadblocks was to catch people
who distribute drugs.

If the city's position prevails, Justice David Souter asked whether police
could then stop pedestrians on a random basis and question them in an effort
to catch those who distribute drugs on foot.

``Motorists enjoy a diminished expectation of privacy,'' Chinn replied.

Justice Stephen Breyer told Chinn the ``difficulty with his case'' was that
it would be no different to stop cars in general to stop crime than it would
be to stop pedestrians in general.

Justice Antonin Scalia asked whether police could set up roadblocks in an
effort to catch burglars. ``I don't see anything special about this,'' he
said of the drug checkpoints.

Justice Department (news - web sites) lawyer Patricia Millett supported the
city. She argued that the roadblocks do not violate the Constitution's
Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals against unreasonable searches
and seizures.

Souter asked whether her position would result in pedestrian checkpoints.
She answered that cars were different, regulated for safety reasons.