SCOTUS drives another nail into Fourth Amendment's coffin

Well this really sucks. The US Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Illinois police in a case where the police brought in a drug sniffing dog during a routine traffic stop based solely on the fact the driver appeared nervous. Jeeez, who isn't nervous when they're stopped by the police. Hell, even when they are just following you on the highway and you know you're not doing anything wrong, don't you get nervous?

The court upheld this (in my opinion) Fourth Amendment violation by a vote of 6-2. "In a dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg bemoaned what she called the broadening of police search powers, saying the use of drug dogs will make routine traffic stops more "adversarial." She was joined in her dissent in part by Justice David H. Souter."

"Injecting such animal into a routine traffic stop changes the character of the encounter between the police and the motorist. The stop becomes broader, more adversarial and (in at least some cases) longer," she wrote.

Rehnquist unsurprisingly in his current state of health, was absent - not that it would have helped. It likely he would have voted with the majority anyway.