AI-powered
podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
15min chapter
Illinois v. Caballes
5-4
Dissenting Views on Fourth Amendment and Drug-Sniffing Dogs
Justices Souter and Ginsburg dissent in a Fourth Amendment case, arguing against the broadened scope of investigations during routine traffic stops. The chapter explores the implications of allowing drug-sniffing dogs without Fourth Amendment scrutiny, raising concerns about privacy rights erosion and potential misuse by law enforcement. It critiques the reliance on drug detection dogs in traffic stops, citing low success rates and highlighting the flaws in assumptions guiding their use.
00:00
Transcript
Episode notes
Get the Snipd
podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered
Discover
highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any
moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share
& Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered
podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover
highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode