Boy, 13, forced to take alcohol breath test, ACLU suit alleges

[Bozita]

Last Updated: September 20. 2011 11:52AM
Boy, 13, forced to take alcohol breath test, suit alleges
Steve Pardo/ The Detroit News


Detroit— A lawsuit filed today in federal court alleges that Livonia Police violated the rights of a 13-year-old boy by forcing him and a group of friends to take an alcohol-breath test without their consent or a warrant.

Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit, said students from Canton Township's Discovery Middle School were celebrating their graduation in June at Livonia's Rotary Park.

The 13-year-old and some classmates went walking in the woods and when they returned, were accused of drinking by an assistant principal.

The school official had followed the group into the woods and saw an empty liquor bottle on the ground. The administrator called police and forced the boys to take the breath test, said Dan Korobkin, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan.

"Federal and state courts have ruled over and over again that if a teen is not driving, the police need a search warrant to administer a breath test," Korobkin said in a release. "The Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement is designed to prevent exactly what happened in this case. When there is no evidence that a child has done anything wrong, he should never be subjected to this degrading and embarrassing procedure in front of his teachers and peers."

more...
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110920/METRO01/109200408/Boy--13--forced-to-take-alcohol-breath-test--suit-alleges#ixzz1YVxcEASK

[monmouth]

1. Perhaps projecting their own misspent youth on these poor kids....n/t

[BlueIris]

2. I really love the ACLU. They can have as much of my money as they want.

They've managed to never hit a wrong note with me.

[JVS]

5. Read

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission

[saras]

8. Read. Doesn't change anything.

In particular, the only relevant reference to the ACLU was http://www.nysun.com/national/aclu-may-reverse-course-on-campaign-finance/86899/, where they recognize that Citizens United was so unusual - what the ACLU calls a "Skokie moment" after their decicion to fight for the rights of neo-nazis to constitutionally protected free speech - that they are seriously considering a fundamental policy change.

They still appear to be trying their best to do the right thing, given their chosen territory. Personally I'll leave for the fanatical right wing the idea that laws and constitutional principles should be overridden every time they prove inconvenient.

[JVS]

11. It changes a lot for me. If they view corporations as my equal then they can get their fucking...

donations there because they're not getting another fucking cent of my speech/money after that!

[FiveGoodMen]

6. They also sided with Citizens United

[CBGLuthier]

7. They support the constitution, not agendas.

which is why they deserve respect. They don't have biases.

[FiveGoodMen]

9. If the constitution says that corps are people who can dump all the money they want on our elections

Then why is everyone here so upset with the Supreme Court for declaring it?

[jberryhill]

10. That is their view

You know what... the Roman Catholic church opposes the death penalty.

I agree with them on that.

And not much else.

[Liberal_in_LA]

3. kick

[surrealAmerican]

4. What ever happened to calling the kids' parents?

Their assistant principal had no reason to call the police in the first place for this. The same would be true even if he knew for certain that the children had been drinking.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

12. 'Cause the cops got tasers, silly!