-
Yes. Police can, will, and often do lie; especially if it helps them make arrests. The rules regarding entrapment usually tip in favor of law-enforcement, so police won't hesitate to trick you into incriminating yourself or others...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
As a general rule, searches conducted without a valid search warrant signed by a judge violate the Fourth Amendment, but like most rules of law, there are a number of explicit exceptions. In fact, most searches occur without warrants because police take advantage of these exceptions to the Fourth Amendment...
-
No. We teach people that they have rights, and that these rights are secured by the principal documents that guarantee our civil liberties -- the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. An informed individual who invokes his constitutional protections is doing exactly what our nation's founders intended. They created these documents to...
-
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...
-
College students suffer from an unfortunate lack of privacy rights in many situations. The university owns the dorm, so school officials can often search rooms at their own discretion. College students still have 4th Amendment rights that apply in other situations...
-
Unfortunately, police may sometimes search you even if you refuse consent. If they find anything illegal, you'll have to get a lawyer and fight it out in court, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the search will hold up...
-
Everyone should be trained to assert their constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment in order to avoid the hassle and humiliation of police misconduct and illegal searches. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics report on citizen-police contacts...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
|
Written by Martha Neil, ABA Journal
|
|
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 00:00 |
|
When she developed aggressive breast cancer, a Texas nurse says, her insurer canceled her individual medical insurance policy. The purported reason was that she had failed to disclose information when she applied for the health coverage -- she had once visited a dermatologist about her acne.
Such stories of health coverage rescinded as soon as policyholders of three insurance companies got sick, following months or years of premium payments, elicited bipartisan outrage yesterday during testimony before the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, reports the Los Angeles Times.
While representatives of three health care insurers said coverage was rescinded due to policyholder misrepresentation, testimony and a committee investigation suggested otherwise: Insurers seemingly gamed fraud laws and canceled over inadvertent or unimportant omissions, in order to save money on expensive health care they were contractually obligated to provide, the newspaper reports. At least one insurer has linked recissions to positive evaluations for employees, although it contends this was an isolated occurrence, and employees were also paid bonuses as a result of their work to canceled coverage.
Such recissions have sparked litigation and calls for legislation, in California and elsewhere, to require insurers to establish fraud in order to cancel coverage, the Times recounts.
They also show it will be necessary to offer a "public option" for medical insurance if individuals are required to have coverage as part of a possible health care reform program, said Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.).
"This could reshape the debate," patient advocate Jerry Flanagan of the Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog tells the Times. "When insurance companies go under oath and admit they are canceling innocent patients when they get sick, it makes it very difficult for lawmakers to pass a law that requires every American to buy a policy or face a tax fine. It opens the way for a public option to hold the companies in check."
Share this with the world:         
|
|
What are we doing?
The 4th Amendment Podcast
|
|
Comments