Pit Stop Policing Transforms Traffic Violations Into High-Stakes Drug Hunts
South Carolina's Operation Rolling Thunder targets cash and contraband but harasses guilty and innocent travelers alike.

This is part five of Operation Shakedown, a series about heavy-handed traffic enforcement tactics and property seizures in Spartanburg County, South Carolina. Click here to read part one.
When officers stopped a Greyhound bus for going 5 mph over the speed limit on Interstate 85 in Spartanburg County, South Carolina, they were not interested in traffic enforcement.
The real target was drugs and cash, which the police pursued with factory-like precision. NASCAR pit crews could learn something about speed and efficiency from these experts.
The Florence County deputy who pulled that bus over on October 5, 2022, advised the driver of his violation and ordered him to gather his documents and come to the front of the patrol vehicle. By this time, a K9 handler had already moved into position with a drug dog for an open-air sniff around the bus exterior.
When the expected "positive indication" came, additional officers began opening suitcases in the undercarriage. Soon they had located more than 5 pounds of cocaine in vacuum-sealed bags. Using this evidence as probable cause, the police entered the bus cabin and began searching carry-on bags.
No Consent Needed
Officers did not need consent at this point. All the passengers were now criminal suspects.
The prize came when deputies opened a black bag between the feet of a passenger from Eden, North Carolina. The carry-on was stuffed with $500,000 cash—the biggest haul by far during Operation Rolling Thunder, a law enforcement blitz from October 2–6, 2022.
Homeland Security agents were on the scene within minutes to seize the currency and begin civil forfeiture. The passenger sitting with the bag claimed not to be its owner, relinquishing his claim to the cash, and went away in handcuffs. DNA evidence later linked him to the cocaine.
The bus driver received a traffic warning, the innocent passengers repacked their luggage, and the bus resumed its journey from Raleigh to Atlanta. The entire incident from start to finish took less than one hour.
The agencies then reset the trap and waited for their next target. Over the course of five days, teams conducted an average of one search every 23 minutes from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. Most of these intrusions were fruitless. Of 144 vehicle searches over five days, 102 turned up nothing at all, yet the officers kept trying.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Robo-Enforcement
The automation is a problem. Courts allow individual pretextual traffic stops and systematic programs of roadside stops. But they do not allow the combination of these two things. Systemic programs like DUI checkpoints cannot be pretextual.
The Supreme Court recognized this boundary in the 2000 decision City of Indianapolis v. Edmond. In that case, law enforcement agencies established a system of roadside checkpoints. Some of the stops were legitimate: Officers would look for signs of impairment and also examine vehicles for safety issues. But the real purpose of the checkpoints was to search for drugs and, by extension, cash. The Supreme Court held that this violated the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees the right of the people to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."
As the court explained, even if such stops might be permissible to look for drunk drivers or other safety issues, "the checkpoint program unquestionably has the primary purpose of interdicting illegal narcotics."
Two of a Kind
Operation Rolling Thunder bears a striking resemblance to the Indianapolis checkpoint program. In both cases, law enforcement agencies operate an official program that involves pulling people over to search their vehicles. Law enforcement does this without any reasonable suspicion that a drug crime has occurred.
In both cases, the stops might be justified on other grounds—for traffic enforcement in Spartanburg County and to look for drunk drivers or other safety issues in Indianapolis. It is the programmatic purpose of searching for drugs and cash that makes the operations unconstitutional.
Put differently, pretextual stops are generally constitutional because courts hesitate to inquire into the subjective motivations of individual officers. But there is no need to look at the subjective motivation of any officer during Operation Rolling Thunder.
Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright has declared the purpose of the entire law enforcement blitz. He talks openly about using traffic laws to go after cash. "You charge somebody with a crime, and there's no reaction," he told reporters in 2019. "But you take their money, and you'll see a drug dealer cry."
On his campaign website, he has talked about forfeiture revenue filling the department's coffers. He says deputies receive "new equipment and technology such as mobile data terminals, cell phones and Tasers."
Wright does not mention the innocent people caught in Operation Rolling Thunder. This includes every passenger on the Atlanta-bound bus except one. Since the annual crackdowns began in 2006, the number of victims is likely in the thousands.
Operation Rolling Thunder is lucrative. But innocent I-85 travelers do not shed their constitutional rights when they enter Spartanburg County.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Butt... Butt... Butt do these kinds of operations help to "make the libs cry"? If they help to "make the libs cry", then shit's ALL worth shit! LAWN ODOR above all else, dammit!!!
What's sad is that we know they're doing this, their government knows they're doing this, the courts know they're doing this, everybody knows they're doing this, and no one does anything about it. That's pretty much the definition of lawlessness.
It's Stupid Government Tricks all the way down.
* It would cost a fortune in legal fees to fight this, and you're fighting a government whose employees have basically infinite taxes to fight for their very survival outside of prison.
* It would also take years, bouncing up and down the courts, with injunctions, stays, appeals, and delays at every step.
* And all the time you're dependent on government employees ruling against other government employees and trashing their own hopes for promotion to those same courts which are judging their decisions.
* You're also dependent on your own lawyers persisting in spite of knowing they are poisoning their own chances of getting fair treatment in the future from all those same government employees they are charging with criminal corruption and conspiracy.
The only solution is to end monopoly government. Victim enforcement, private police and courts. Of course it will never happen, but to recognize the evil properly is always the first step.
I like to imagine how different society would be is the only changes were victim enforcement, private courts, and private police. Governments would continue passing all the idiotic laws they do.
* If there are no victims, then there is no enforcement.
* Even if bystanders file charges, they have to show a victim on whose behalf they are prosecuting ... such as a murder victim.
* Because laws have to be understood to be obeyed, anyone can file charges that a law is not understandable, to be heard by a panel of truly random jurors, and if they can't agree on what a law does, it is voided. There would be no appeal by the law's backers, because all an appeal does is show that yes, there is disagreement about what the law does, and that is the whole point of the jury.
* Inconsistent enforcement is another way to show a law is not understandable. If only a few people file charges for a specific law, and almost everybody else ignores violations, then no one really knows the practical effects of the law, and it too is defective and voided.
And so on.
“Inconsistent enforcement is another way to show a law is not understandable…”
Or is designed to be used in lawfare.
Exactly. But I was describing how to fix it (not that it ever will be). Everyone knows why laws are inconsistently enforced.
From what I have read here they advertise when they will be doing this so how stupid are these drug runners? If you have 500k in cash and all that coke seems you could afford a non-descript car and take any road other than the Interstate where they will be looking for you.
Soon they had located more than 5 pounds of cocaine in vacuum-sealed bags.
Seems like this is where you should have ended the article.
All the passengers were now criminal suspects.
Actually, I bet it was just one of them.
The prize came when deputies opened a black bag between the feet of a passenger from Eden, North Carolina. The carry-on was stuffed with $500,000 cash
Well, I take it back. Perhaps you should elaborate on this particular passenger. That’s a LOT of money to be sitting in a satchel at a bus rider’s feet.
Also, didn’t you tell us earlier that these are poor downtrodden “unbanked” people who carry cash because they can’t afford banking or some dumb nonsense?
Half a mil seems like a lot for someone who’s forced onto public transportation.
So, tell us more about this guy they found on the bus carrying a half-mil, and whether or not he had any relation to the cocaine.
No?
No????
Bueller????
The passenger sitting with the bag claimed not to be its owner, relinquishing his claim to the cash
How odd! Did anyone else on the bus claim that the money was theirs? How about the cocaine?
Also, what a lucky find for them! Such serendipity! I mean, who would have thought a random traffic stop would turn into a huge drug bust?
Or… was it not random, and they had a pretty darn good idea of which bus to stop and why?
"Or… was it not random, and they had a pretty darn good idea of which bus to stop and why?"
From the article: "Of 144 vehicle searches over five days, 102 turned up nothing at all, yet the officers kept trying.
So 70% of the searches found nothing. No, they did not have a "pretty darn good idea" of which bust to stop.
Well, see - first, we have to be real careful with the term "144 vehicle searches" - because Reason has admittedly to playing fast and loose with that term. I'm guessing what they're obfuscating is "144 vehicle stops and K9 sniffs" - which aren't actually a search.
And let's consider the basis of this Operation in the first place. Could it possibly be that SC authorities got wind of a large drug/money shipment from a CI who was scant on the details, but knew for sure it'd be coming from out of state? I mean, you don't think they ran this Op just for fun, did you? Reason seems to imply they did - but Reason is also ridiculous and moronic.
Don't you find it odd that they broke the most important part of the story - the successful seizure of drugs and drug money - into five part? Like, they spent the entire week trying to frame their ACAB narrative, but now they're finally coming forth with the fact that it was, in fact, a solid drug bust? And not just some passer-thru's dimebag - but 5 keys and a half-million bucks.
Do you think this "series of articles" would have had the same impact if their initial lede had been, "SC Police Seize 5 kilos of cocaine and $500,000 from suspects traveling interstate."
Naaaaah, that wouldn't have the 4 day ACAB narrative buildup, would it. Except now it's not ACAB anymore. It's just cops doing their job and getting junk and its peddlers off the streets.
Perhaps you didn't read where most of their searches weren't even reported.
Perhaps you forgot that liberty doesn't include letting the government dictate what you ingest.
This person (AT) isn't worth the 20 seconds it takes to type a response.
Just the lack of reading comprehension in the following is terrible.
"All the passengers were now criminal suspects.
Actually, I bet it was just one of them."
Perhaps you forget that there are laws on the books and, despite how much you might not like them, they are enforceable by the State.
But that's neither here nor there. If you have a gripe with the law itself, take it up with the legislature. Not, as Reason does, with the cops.
All the passengers were now criminal suspects.
Actually, I bet it was just one of them.
No, they were all criminal suspects insofar as it permitted the police to treat them as such. Much like how having a desire to fly on a plane is suspicious enough activity to allow the TSA to pat down anyone they want who passes through a checkpoint, which is necessary to engage in the perfectly legal activity of commercial flying.
Well, I suppose you could try to characterize it that way. But it's it's a stretch of the word "suspect."
I think I told you the time I was held at gunpoint by cops, no? Same thing. I was a "suspect" because I was on a reported active crime scene as they were investigating it. I was then immediately cleared following my cooperation and lack of any evidence of to suggest I was up to anything untoward.
Same would go for the passengers, especially after they zeroed in on the guy with the huge bag of cash.
But that's neither here nor there as far as any rights are concerned.
"So, tell us more about this guy they found on the bus carrying a half-mil, and whether or not he had any relation to the cocaine.
No?
No????
Bueller????"
They did tell you more. "DNA evidence later linked him to the cocaine." Are you ignoring stuff favorable to your position just so you can complain it's not there?
OK, so Forensics 101. DNA might link him, but it's not the Rosetta Stone of crime solving. DNA is an often overpresent thing (esp. on public transportation), and humans get it everywhere. But that's neither here nor there.
The point - since day one of this stupid ACAB narrative - was that Reason has been shaping this story in a very clear and specific way. They spent four days prejudicing us against police practices - few, if any of which are even Constitutionally questionable, let alone objectionable - but then shoehorned in the fact that it did, in fact, result in a large drug bust. And an arrest, in which everyone but the trafficker got to go where they were going that day with nothing more than a slight inconvenience to their interstate travel.
I'll bet they even clapped while the guy was put in cuffs and shoved into the back of a cruiser.
The point is the whole dishonesty of it all. The blatant, brazen dishonesty of FIVE DAYS of reporting on the same subject - just to wind up exactly where I figured we would. Lots of smoke, but no major fire. Like they had to begrudgingly admit in a one-line throwaway, "Turns out it there was drug trafficking and they caught the guy."
Aren't you sick of being lied to, Dave? Aren't you sick to death of your "news" being narrative chum instead of information? Aren't you appalled at how easy it is to poke holes in - which I did all week - because of how brazen they are in their obvious deceit?
Because I sure af am.