Supreme Court Says Officers Can Search Passengers

[Kat Kanning]

WASHINGTON (AP) _ The Supreme Court ruled Monday that police officers have leeway to frisk a passenger in a car stopped for a traffic violation even if nothing indicates the passenger has committed a crime or is about to do so.
The court on Monday unanimously overruled an Arizona appeals court that threw out evidence found during such an encounter.
The case involved a 2002 pat-down search of an Eloy, Ariz., man by an Oro Valley police officer, who found a gun and marijuana.
The justices accepted Arizona's argument that traffic stops are inherently dangerous for police and that pat-downs are permissible when an officer has a reasonable suspicion that the passenger may be armed and dangerous.
The pat-down is allowed if the police "harbor reasonable suspicion that a person subjected to the frisk is armed, and therefore dangerous to the safety of the police and public," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.

[Bill St. Clair]

Sounds to me like a mighty good way to make traffic stops even more dangerous for police.

[Pat K]

There goes the 9 nincompoops again
protecting our Liberty.

[grasshopper]

   Reasonable suspission??  Armed, you mean 1/3 of NH?
   Nice, lets kill this in the NH house, NOW. (the opinion).

[KBCraig]

Funny, just a couple of months ago they ruled that passengers are not "detained" in a traffic stop, so they're free to leave.

[Russell Kanning]

an agent of the state might get hurt ... that is the most important matter to this gang