It turns out that ignorance of the law is an excuse, for cops.

[Savannahmann]

The Police are empowered to enforce the law, but it turns out they don't actually have to know the law they're enforcing. Now we've all heard the argument that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Normally during traffic or other minor violations, this statement is one of the most asinine one can say, or hear. If you don't know what the rules are, how can you be expected to obey them? Ignorance is probably the only real excuse, and if you're a cop, it's a great one.

A friend of mine sent me a link to this post online.

With Orwellian irony, the U.S. Supreme Court chose December 15, National Bill of Rights Day, to deliver its crushing blow to the Fourth Amendment. Although the courts have historically held that ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law, in its 8-1 ruling in Heien v. State of North Carolina, the Supreme Court gave police in America one more ready excuse to routinely violate the laws of the land–this time under the guise of ignorance.

The Heien case, which started with an improper traffic stop based on a police officer’s ignorance of the law and ended with an unlawful search, seizure, and arrest, was supposed to ensure that ignorance of the law did not become a ready excuse for government officials to routinely violate the law.

The actual Supreme Court decision is here.

So here's the story. The Police Officer pulls a motorist over for violating a non existent law, conducts an illegal search, finds evidence of drugs, and arrests the victim of his mistake. Let's do that again. The Motorist was not breaking the law when they were pulled over, the cop thought it was a law, but was wrong. So ignorance of the law is the perfect excuse. Now, here's the frightening thing. Only one Supreme Court Justice thought that someone enforcing a non existent law was a bad thing. Justice Sotomayor.

Now, what this means is that the more idiotic the police are, the more they can get away with. "Hell I didn't know it was wrong to beat a man with a shovel, is that a new rule?"

Ignorance of the law, is actually a perfectly acceptable excuse for police abuses.

[Orrex]

1. Would this precedent allow civilians to plead ignorance of the law as well?

Or does it apply only to those who are extentively trained to, you know, enforce the law?

[Volaris]

12. ahhahahahaha....

you're funny today. =)

HELL NO it won't apply to civilians. Because of course, OF COURSE you and I are supposed to behave in a law-abiding manner (meaning, we should be all up to speed on what our legal responsibilities are, after all, we're the law-ABIDER'S).
Law ENFORCEMENT, certainly can't be expected to know (and obey) the Law, after all, since they are disposing all of their energy ENFORCING said law...
Besides, it's still your (our) fault, because if you (we) were being a good law-abiding citizen, then the cops would never have any reason to stop ANYONE, and Officer ignorance of the Law would in that case, OBVIOUSLY be a non-issue....they could all be as dumb as rocks, and IT WOULDN'T MATTER AT ALL, you see.

Trust us, it's your fault. Arguing that it's not, is just you proving how desperate you are to be right, which is a sign that you KNOW how wrong (and guilty) you KNOW yourself to be.

--The Police.

[Action_Patrol]

2. Perhaps the person with drugs in their car

Shouldn't have consented to a search of their vehicle? There is the issue. The cop pulled them over for what turned out to be an illegal stop. They consented to a search when they didn't have to.
The cop won by being an idiot and the person that was pulled over lost by being an idiot.

[Action_Patrol]

3. The quoted portion above is deliberately misleading

Calling it an 'unlawful search and seizure' it inaccurate when it was consented to.
If some asshole cop walks up to you and asks to look through your stuff, say "NO". As soon as you consent, you lose any right you have to fight it in court.

[Savannahmann]

5. Indeed?

So pulling someone over for violating a non existent crime is perfectly cool in your mind? If you can not profit from an illegal action, as evidenced from various laws from RICO to the prohibition of criminals writing books for profit on their exploits, then why should the Police be allowed to continue after an illegal action?

Justice Sotomayor in her dissent indicated it was a further erosion of the 4th Amendment, which if memory serves covers searches doesn't it?

[Action_Patrol]

7. Way to put words in my mouth

I said nor hinted at anything of the sort.
A cop can pull you over for nearly anything they want. Is it bullshit? Absolutely. They could have pulled this guy over for anything for 'failure to use a turn signal' or 'erratic driving'. Both things that I have been pulled over for by cops that were out trolling.
This person fucked up by consenting to a search when they were pulled over for a tail light

[True Blue Door]

4. Not merely an excuse - practically a job requirement.

[Savannahmann]

6. Especially with the growing body of case law encouraging it.

From cases like Westhoven where probable cause was driving below the speed limit and sitting up straight. You know, driving carefully. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-bodine/federal-court-the-police-_b_5223918.html

Hell, I've got to run shortly, I've got no time to highlight all the erosions of our Civil Rights. What is sickening is that most of these erosions are not split decisions, but wide majority decisions by the Supreme Court. It turns out that both Liberal and Conservative Justices love them some police power.

[truebluegreen]

8. "8-1"

[TheKentuckian]

9. But remember "Supreme Court, Supreme Court, Supreme Court!" and "it is about the Court, stupid"

Got to install more "Democrats" to rule for the corporations, the police, and the surveillance state because...because...because...I guess we can't let have the TeaPubliKlans take all the responsibility of dismantling our rights, refusing to control corporations, breaking all labor but the cops, annihilating the very concept of accountability for the rich and powerful, and undoing protections going back to the Magna Carta.

[90-percent]

10. How many of us are well educated in how to handle a police traffic stop?

I have to brush up on that myself. But, one of the most horrifying things in the tilted playing field that is our Authoritarian criminal justice system is the fact that it is PERFECTLY LEGAL FOR POLICE TO KNOWINGLY LIE TO YOU!

And even if you are well educated on your rights, cops can be intimidating and forceful and use fear to make you reveal things you shouldn't have to without a warrant. It takes a lot of courage to defy a cop, even if you know you are right and they are wrong.

I think I need to hire a Constitutional Lawyer to ride with me every time I leave the driveway!

-90% Jimmy

[Enthusiast]

11. There is only one suitable response.