The Obama DOJ urged the Supreme Court's endorsement of strip searches.
Were you aware of this? Are you surprised by it?
The march to fascism is bipartisan now, and, really, that is the key to its success. We see it in all types of Bush-like authoritarian policies that have survived into the Obama administration, as well as new ones that are now being defended by corporate Democrats...NDAA indefinite detention, warrantless surveillance, spy centers, you name it. As long as people remain so blindly partisan that they will refuse to stand against what is clearly wrong just because it comes from their own party, we will never have a unified opposition to oppression.
The corporate elite in both parties have figured that out and use it to their advantage. We will see how long it takes the people to figure it out.
_________________________________________________________
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/03/the_obama_doj_and_strip_searches/singleton/
The Obama DOJ and strip searches
By Glenn Greenwald
Numerous progressive commentators are lambasting the Supreme Court for its 5-4 ruling yesterday in Florence v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders, and rightfully so. The 5-judge conservative faction held that prison officials may strip-search anyone arrested even for the most minor offenses before admitting them to the general population of a jail or prison, even in the absence of a shred of suspicion that they are carrying weapons or contraband. The plaintiff in this case had been erroneously arrested for outstanding bench warrants for an unpaid fine that he had actually paid, and was twice subjected to forced strip searches; he sued, claiming a violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. In essence, the Florence ruling grants prison officials license to subject every single arrested individual entering the general prison population to humiliating and highly invasive strip searches (that’s 13 million people every year, with hugely disproportionately minority representation), based on the definitive police state mentality — one that has been applied over and over — that isolated risks justify the most sweeping security measures. This policy has been applied to those arrested for offenses such as dog leash laws, peaceful protests, and driving with an expired license.
What virtually none of this anti-Florence commentary mentioned, though, was that the Obama DOJ formally urged the Court to reach the conclusion it reached. While the Obama administration and court conservatives have been at odds in a handful of high-profile cases (most notably Citizens United and the health care law), this is yet another case, in a long line, where the Obama administration was able to have its preferred policies judicially endorsed by getting right-wing judges to embrace them:
....
The Obama administration is siding with the prisons in the case and urging the court to allow a blanket policy for all inmates set to enter the general prison population.
“When you have a rule that treats everyone the same,” Justice Department lawyer Nicole A. Saharsky argued, “you don’t have folks that are singled out. You don’t have any security gaps.”
As The Guardian said yesterday: “The decision was a victory for the jails and for the Obama administration..."
= new reply since forum marked as read
regardless of whether we by donkey or elephant brand
same stuff, different box
