CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Harcourt and Meares on Randomization and the Fourth Amendment

HarcourtBernard_01 Meares_tracey(1) Bernard E. Harcourt (left) and Tracey L. Meares  (University of Chicago - Law School and Yale University) have posted Randomization and the Fourth Amendment on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Randomized checkpoint searches are generally taken to be the exact antitheses of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment. In the eyes of most jurists, checkpoint searches violate the central requirement of valid Fourth Amendment searches – namely, individualized suspicion. We disagree. In this article, we contend that randomized searches should form the very lodestar of a reasonable search. The fact is that the notion of “individualized” suspicion is misleading; most suspicion in the modern policing context is group-based and not individual specific. Randomized searches by definition are accompanied by a certain level of suspicion. The constitutional issue, we maintain, should not turn on the question of suspicion-based versus suspicionless police searches, but on the level of suspicion that attaches to any search program and on the evenhandedness of the program. In essence, we argue for a new paradigm of randomized encounters that satisfy a base level of suspicion and that will provide the benefits of both privacy-protection (by ensuring a minimum level of suspicion) and evenhandedness (by cabining police discretion), the very values we wish to protect through the Fourth Amendment.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2010/09/harcourt-and-meares-on-randomization-and-the-fourth-amendment.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment