Did or Didn't, Doesn't Really Matter

In an update to something I blogged about in the fall, the Supreme Court has decided the case of an Alabama man arrested under a false warrant. As a recap, the issue at hand was not whether or not the search was legal or not – it wasn’t – but whether it’s reasonable to expect the government to keep up-to-date records and if convictions predicated on out-of-date or incorrect information can be upheld by the courts. According to a five-to-four decision by the Roberts Court, it can.

This man went to get his truck out of the impound lot. An investigator at the sheriff’s office knew of his criminal past and looked up his warrants in the county they were in: nothing. So, he had them looked up in the next county over, which did bring up a warrant. The problem is, that warrant had been withdrawn five months earlier. They went and arrested him for that (bogus) warrant and discovered meth amphetamines and a hand gun in his car. He was later convicted of drug charges and possessing a firearm. The Roberts Court decided that this was an inbounds use of federal power, even though the man was arrested initially for something that wasn’t real.

This case was once again decided with the conservative bloc pitted against the (somewhat) liberal bloc, with Anthony M. Kennedy casting the spoiler vote. While the next couple of justices to retire are likely to be from that liberal bloc, it reminds me once again of how pleased I am that we’re not going to face the prospect of a McCain Administration ramming a ramming another movement conservative onto the courts while screaming “No litmus tests, no litmus tests!” We will, of course, have to watch a solidly Democrat Congress and Administration slowly bow to conservative caterwauling, but hopefully we won’t end up with another Roberts or Alito.