At the gates of the fortress

Star-Telegram | Don Erler:

“Last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision in Georgia vs. Randolph tells us much about new Chief Justice John Roberts, just as it illuminates parts of the Constitution's right to privacy. The facts are simple. Janet Randolph invited police into her and her estranged husband's home in order to expose his use of illegal drugs. Scott Randolph told police not to enter. Five justices agreed that the evidence obtained by the officers should not have been admitted at trial because their warrantless search was constitutionally invalid.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Two residents stand in the doorway. One says no. One says yes. Who do police have to listen to? The Supreme Court says no means no. Even one no. They sided with the man who said no to the police.

The Supreme Court could have ruled the other way and the Republic wouldn't fall. Still, it's refreshing to see a ruling that reinforces our basic liberties, even a little bit. All too often, rulings chip away at our fundamental rights, either for national security, or for fighting crime, or for protecting the unborn, or for protecting ourselves from ourselves. Before you know it, the Bill of Rights is a convenient fiction, a historical curiosity, a reminder of what rights Americans used to enjoy. But every so often, the Supreme Court slows the erosion of our rights. This was such a case. Celebrate it.