Traffic stops require reasonable suspicion to pull over your car under the Fourth Amendment. I find it hard to explain how a DUI checkpoint is not a similar action to a traffic stop.
From a common-sense standpoint, I don't see how a DUI checkpoint isn't fundamentally similar to a traffic stop, regardless of the SCOTUS decision that permits them.
The Fourth Amendment doesn't come with "unless it's super crime-y" exceptions.
https://www.westmifflinpolice.com/west-mifflin-dui-checkpoin...
86% of the citations they issued at that “DUI” checkpoint were not for DUIs.
The name is misleading. It’s not a DUI Checkpoint. It’s just a checkpoint. The definition of a police state.
It seems pretty obvious that inconveniencing 100 sober drivers for 5 minutes to prevent a drunk driving death would be worth it, even if 2 others get cited for unrelated offences. Simply citing unrelated citations doesn't really present a full picture.
>Thank god one's civil liberties aren't dependent on whether or not you are convinced by them.
Apparently they are dependent on whether SCOTUS is convinced.
A DUI checkpoint is fundamentally different because police are unable to discriminate who they stop. They stop everyone who passes through the checkpoint.