Gail Atwater was driving her two children home from a 1997 soccer practice in Lago Vista, Texas, when she was stopped by police. Her crime? She and her children were not wearing seatbelts, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum $50 fine. But instead of just ticketing her, the officer arrested and handcuffed her. The children were picked up by a friend. Atwater's pickup truck was towed and Atwater was taken to the police station, where a mug shot was taken, she was booked and released after posting bond. She later pleaded no contest to the seatbelt violation and paid a $50 fine.
Atwater and her husband then sued the city and the police officer for violating her Fourth Amendment rights.
Atwater's suit was thrown out by a federal district court; then reinstated by a three-judge appellate court panel. The full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the three-judge panel, ruling she could not sue, saying the officer believed she had violated the law and the arrest was not carried out in an "extraordinary manner."
Nope, not extraordinary at all when two children witness their mom being arrested, handcuffed and hauled off to jail, because none of them were wearing seatbelts. It wasn't as though she had held up a liquor store, was driving under the influence or committed vehicular homicide. She was just a soccer mom driving her kids home from practice. Under Texas law, had she been stopped for speeding, no arrest would have occurred.
Obviously, in the minds of the full appeals court and the five Supremes who upheld them, however the incident might have traumatized the children was of no consequence. Children are only important while they are still inside the womb; once out and breathing on their own, who cares.
And which of the five Supremes went around the bend in this one? None other than four of the Scalia Five who appointed George W. Bush president: Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The fifth was Justice David H. Souter of all people.
Writing for the majority, Souter said, "The arrest and booking were inconvenient to Atwater, but not so extraordinary as to violate the Fourth Amendment."
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who was bent on installing Bush in the White House and provided the fifth vote to do exactly that, this time wrote the minority opinion. Calling Atwater's arrest unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, O'Connor said it made no sense to say the arrest served no state purpose while also saying it passed constitutional muster.
Oh, but that is where O'Connor is wrong. It makes perfect sense in states that compel all arrestees to provide DNA samples for the growing DNA databases. And therein lies the horror of this ruling.
Never mind that the courts have already upheld the laws of some states that allow every detainee to be stripped searched, regardless of how minor the crime they are accused of. Hey, you never know what some granny might be concealing in a body orifice. Now the states are being given carte blanche to arrest you at any time on any whim that you might have broken some law or other, just so they can extract a DNA sample from you.
The city's lawyer in Atwater v. Lago Vista successfully argued that cops often don't have enough information to know whether you committed a misdemeanor or a felony, and we might add whether you broke any law at all. It's the very essence of your being they want: your DNA.
Lordy help you if your DNA contains genes showing you have a predisposition to any costly diseases, because you can count on that information turning up in the hands of insurance companies, who will deny you life or health insurance; prospective employers, who will deny you a job; even current employers, who will find some excuse to fire you; and banks that will deny you mortgages and loans.
And you thought you lived in a free society, where individual rights and privacy were protected, eh? Wake up! You are staring into the face of "friendly" fascism that turns uglier by the day. We no longer have government of, by and for the people. It is now government of, by and for the corporations. Corporation that have installed their puppet in the White House and are now eyeing the rest of the world. Consent of the governed? You must be joking, the governed don't get the chance to consent to anything in a police state.
Of course, we could spare them the trouble of arresting us one by one on some pretense or other by merely marching down to our local cop shops and offer up our DNA. And don't forget to send a thank you note to our illustrious Supremes, who don't have far to go now in shredding what is left of our Constitution.
On Line Journal ©
Online Journal - ONLINE JOURNAL
MY TWO BEADS WORTH EDITORIAL-NEXT
Special Features and News Items
Last updated on March 25, 2006