Under all conditions highway roadblocks for the purpose of checking for.
Illegal substances violate the fourth amendment. In the City of Indianapolis the.
Police force mad highway roadblocks where they would stop cars and ask .
for the drivers license and registration. The search the vehicle with drug sniffing.
dogs. They would seize any illegal substances and arrest the driver.
The police were trying to "address the severe and intractable nature of the drug problem." (Indianapolis vs. Madison.) Which means they were trying to rid of the drug problem in Indianapolis. They though if they would find and arrest drug traffickers, then there wouldn't be a drug problem. Also people would be afraid to drive anywhere with illegal substances in their cars. Thus drugs would not leave the house. The police made these searches randomly without any probable cause at all, which was their biggest fault.
The court ruled that these roadblocks violated the citizen's fourth amendment.
rights therefore the seizures were illegal. The police operated these searches.
without probable cause. In earlier cases of roadblocks where they were looking.
for border crossers or intoxicated drivers the police were enforcing license and.
registration laws. In this case the roadblocks did not serve any "special needs".
beyond the normal need of law enforcement. The court said that these roadblocks would be constitutional if they were for a particular reason such as looking for a fleeing criminal.
I feel that these roadblocks and any other roadblocks of this kind are unconstitutional because they violate our fourth amendment. These policeman were conducting these searches without any probable cause. It clearly states in the constitution "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.