SEARCHING FOR AN EXCUSE

One of Americas' most treasured rights is the Fourth Amendment protection
against "unreasonable searches and seizures." That right will be tested in a
case taken up today by the U.S. Supreme Court in Knowles v. Iowa.

On March 6, 1996, Patrick Knowles was driving in Iowa when he was pulled
over for speeding by officer Ronald Cook. Instead of just issuing a
citation, Mr. Cook demanded to search Mr. Knowles' car and found marijuana
and a pipe . Mr. Cook was tried on possession of drugs, found guilty and
sentenced to 90 days in jail.

The U.S.Supreme Court has allowed searches of cars without a warrant if
someone is arrested or if a police officer has reason to believe a crime has
been committed.

Mr. Cook testified that he didn't think a crime was being committed, but
found the marijuana after a routine search. But Iowa Attorney General
Bridget Chambers, reported the Associated Press, "said traffic stops can be
dangerous and officers should not have to give up a tool that can protect
them."

The Iowa Supreme Court upheld Mr. Knowles' conviction and his lawyer, Maria
Ruhtenberg, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"The U.S. Supreme Court in past rulings has allowed a special exception to
the search in the case of an arrest," Susan Herman, professor at Brooklyn
Law School and a national board member of the ACLU, told us. "If there isn't
an arrest, there isn't an exception. Period. The Iowa Supreme Court is
trying to say there is an exception. The U.S. Supreme Court should say the
reason for allowing a search just shouldn't exit here."

Another perspective came from Erwin Chemerinsky, professor of constitutional
law at the University of Southern California. "The effect of this is to
basically allow the police to search the driver and the passenger
compartments. This is a driver [Mr. Knowles] who was stopped for speeding.
He was stopped for going 43 in a 22 mph zone. There's no need here for the
full search. The guy is out of the car. It's not like there's a need to
search for a weapon. I think this is a substantial expansion of the ability
of the police to search beyond what is needed."

Though the Knowles case involves the state of Iowa, Ms. Herman warned that
it "would be possible" for police in other states to use the case as a
precedent to perform warrantless searches. "It opens up a tremendous amount
to police discretion," she said.

The Supreme Court should overturn the Iowa verdict and not weaken citizens'
Fourth Amendment protections. The right to freedom from unreasonable
searches and seizures is too important to be abridged in any fashion.

Checked-by: Rolf Ernst