And, while I'm at it - on the 4th Amendment

The United States Supreme Court is going to hear a case that ought to be close to the heart of everyone who drives the highways, and in doing so, stretches the boundaries of compliance with the law. For all you non-seat-belt-wearers, speeders, and suspended license people....take heed.

In February of 2003, David Moore was stopped by the Virginia Highway Patrol. His license was suspended. Virginia does not permit arrest for this offense. Despite state law that prohibits an arrest, Mr. Moore was arrested. He was, of course, searched. Predictably, he had drugs on him. Mr. Moore claimed that the evidence procured (the drugs) should not be used as evidence against him because it was the result of an illegal search - relying on a rather traditional view of the exclusionary rule.

Now, driving with license suspended is a misdemeanor under Virginia law, so it is a crime. But, the law only authorizes a citation for the crime, with punishment to be determined later. So, the case that the Court will hear has the State of Virginia arguing that although the law does not permit a person to be deprived of liberty for the conduct proscribed, actually depriving a person of liberty (by detaining and searching them) has no consequnces for the State. Mr. Moore's argument - that an arrest requires "probable cause" and that the cops here could never have probable cause since they knew that an arrest was specifically prohibited, makes more sense to me.