-
No. If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The main reason why officers ask is because they don't have enough evidence to search without your consent. Don't expect an officer to tell you of your right not to consent. Any time you consent to a search request you are naively waiving your constitutional rights.
-
Be aware that private security personnel outnumber police officers in the United States by three to one. As a result, you may be more likely to be confronted by a security guard than by a police officer. You must also be aware of the following places where security personnel (governmental or otherwise) are permitted to search you without a warrant...
-
Your rights do not disappear if the officer threatens to call in the dogs, so don't let this all-too-common tactic intimidate you into consenting to a search. You have several options...
-
This is a tricky issue. The simple answer is that citizens who are minding their own business are not obligated to "show their papers" to police. In fact, there is no law requiring citizens to carry identification of any kind. Once you get passed the surface, however, things get much more complicated...
-
Unfortunately, many people get fooled by some version of this commonly used police officer's line: "Everything will be easier if you just cooperate". That's true to some extent -- it will make things much easier for the police officer who's trying to arrest you! -- but when it comes to you consenting to searches and answering incriminating questions, it couldn't be further from the truth...
-
No. We believe that most police officers are good, hardworking people who are doing a tough job. We need police to safeguard the life, liberty, and property of all people. To do this best, police officers should...
-
In addition to compromising your safety and the safety of others, driving drunk is one of the stupidest things you can do, and one of the easiest ways to create overwhelming legal problems for yourself. DUI laws vary from state to state, and they have become increasingly harsh over the years...
-
Videotaping or photographing police in public places is usually legal, so long as you don't interfere with their activities. Nonetheless, doing so will often get you arrested...
-
Simply put, the number of arrests an officer makes is a major factor used to determine his job performance. Police officers know that the easiest way to make arrests is to find people in possession of illegal drugs, so they want to search everyone they can find...
-
Yes. Minors generally have the same rights as adults. For example, minors can refuse searches and decline to answer questions without an attorney present. Nevertheless, minors face unique challenges when attempting to exercise these rights...
-
No. The courts have made it clear that police officers do not have to tell people that they can refuse to consent to a warrantless search. Also, contrary to the belief perpetuated by popular police television shows, a person will not be read their rights subsequent to being taken into custody. A person only needs to be Mirandized when...
-
During a legitimate traffic stop, police may order the driver and any passengers out of the vehicle. This rule is intended to protect officers' safety, but it's often used for investigatory purposes...
-
Generally not. The Bill of Rights protections that matter most during police encounters are mandated by the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, and all states are required to follow them. States can offer more protection of these rights, but not less. There are some variations regarding...
-
This is one of those "it depends on the circumstances" questions. Police can obtain consent to search from anyone with control over the property; however any occupant of a residence can refuse consent, even if other occupants agree to a search. Unfortunately, you must be present in order to assert your refusal. The Supreme Court has ruled that...
-
The sad fact is that most people believe that they are under some kind of obligation to acquiesce when an officer contacts them and asks permission to search them or their belongings. The truth is exactly the opposite...
|
Over the past two weeks, we've been asking you to e-mail your legislators to oppose the anti-democratic voting legislation that, if passed, would strip rights away from Floridians. Now is your last chance to make your voice heard, we need you to call Senate President Jeff Atwater, Speaker of the House Larry Cretul and Governor Crist today.
Voting is a right, not a privilege, and we oppose legislation that makes it more difficult for people to vote and participate in our democracy. With your help, we can defeat this poisonous legislation. Please take three minutes of your day to make three key phone calls!
1. Senate President Jeff Atwater -- (850) 487-5229
2. Speaker of the House Larry Cretul -- (850) 488-1450 (Cretul is pronounced "kree-tle")
3. Governor Charlie Crist (850) 488-4441
Suggested Script: Hello, my name is (name) and I live in (city). I am calling in regards to legislation relating to voting and elections.
- CALL TO SENATOR ATWATER: "I urge President Atwater NOT to let SB 956, relating to voting and elections, go to the Senate floor. Thank you."
- CALL TO REP. CRETUL: "I urge Speaker Cretul NOT to let EDCA8, relating to voting elections, go to the House floor. Thank you."
- CALL TO GOV. CRIST: "I urge Governor Crist to express his opposition to SB 956 and EDCA8, relating to voting and elections. These bills are bad for Florida voters and bad for democracy. Thank you."
Below are the key reasons for why the ACLU opposes SB 956 and EDCA8. The proposed changes to Florida's voting and elections laws would:
- Expand the "no-solicitation zone," creating a constantly shifting zone that would be impossible to enforce and further restricts voters' ability to receive important nonpartisan voting rights information at the polling place;
- Further limit acceptable IDs, without proposing acceptable alternatives, preventing eligible citizens from registering to vote, and properly registered voters from exercising their right to vote;
- Force more voters to vote by provisional ballots, which have a higher rate of rejection;
- Increase the frequency of "list maintenance programs" causing more validly registered voters to be removed from the voter rolls;
- Extend the deadline for making accessible paper (marksense) ballots available for disabled Floridians, relegating voters with disabilities to four additional years of voting on second class touch screen voting systems;
- Impose unnecessary and onerous restrictions on third-party voter registration groups. This would have the direct effect of decreasing electoral participation by Floridians who are significantly more likely to register through these drives, especially eligible Black and Latino voters; and
- Impose unnecessary and onerous restrictions on groups that collect citizen petitions for ballot measures, making it harder for regular citizens as compared to well-financed corporate interests to get measures on the ballot.
Thank you for taking time to make your voice heard. We appreciate your continued support of the ACLU of Florida's work to defend civil liberties in the Sunshine State!
|
|
The 4th Amendment Podcast
|
|
