(Page 4 of 4)
4. Search warrant? Will a dog’s word do?
reasonable search, a position that both exaggerates the dogs' ability to detect illicit drugs and ignores the fact that the animals are search tools themselves. This builds on an earlier case in which the Court concluded that the canines only detect contraband for which there’s no “reasonable expectation of policy.”Earlier this year, the Supreme Court ruled that the response of a drug-sniffing dog is sufficient to trigger a
In the wake of that earlier ruling, Julian Sanchez warned Reason readers that the decision would have far-reaching effects. The dogs, he wrote, represented a crude version of the “new wave of advanced surveillance tools...capable of detecting not just drugs but weapons, explosives, and illicit computer files, potentially flying under the Fourth Amendment’s radar all the while.”
The foreign intelligence surveillance courts that approve the NSA's telephone and Internet surveillance operations are a bit like the drug-sniffing dogs. The authorities act as though both are infallible, and neither one's judgments can be reviewed or appealed by those at the receiving end of the subsequent search and seizure.