QUESTIONABLE

A Grand Prairie Ordinance Smells Like A Violation Of Civil Rights.

Grand Prairie police and city officials are confident that a new ordinance
that does not require officers to have probable cause to detain a
"suspected drug dealer or user" can survive possible court challenges.

Perhaps they should have waited until the U.S. Supreme Court rules in the
case of Illinois vs. Sam Wardlow before passing the law. It is not
difficult to envision a similar problem arising in Grand Prairie.

In the Illinois case, police chased, stopped, questioned and frisked Sam
Wardlow, who suddenly and for unknown reasons ran from them in a high-crime
area. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the officers overstepped their
authority because they had no probable cause to assume that Wardlow was
guilty of anything -- even though he ran from them. The Supreme Court will
decide if Illinois was right.

Grand Prairie police officials, long frustrated over how to effectively
combat the sale of illegal narcotics, turned to the City Council to enact a
law that will let officers stop and question people with no more probable
cause than a previous indictment or conviction for drug sales. And if these
"known" drug dealers and users don't provide officers with satisfactory
answers about why they are standing around a public place, they can be
arrested.

A similar state law, which would have allowed officers to stop and frisk
juveniles who are on probation or parole, rightfully died during the 1997
legislative session.

The troublesome aspects of this ordinance are numerous: An indictment
becomes a sentence of guilt (city officials should know better); someone
can be arrested because of the answer to a question, not because of
observed illegal behavior; and a Court of Appeals case involving an adult
probationer who was questioned for no other reason than that he was
previously handled by the system was found unconstitutional.

The frustration that officers and residents experience because of illegal
drug activities is understandable, but frustration is no excuse for
suspending an individual's civil rights. Grand Prairie's confidence that it
will weather a possible court challenge may be misplaced.