Isn’t whipping out the slavery card so 1960s? Apparently not. It got whipped out as recently as last week, on the Web site newsone.com. The story was about the Orange County Sheriff’s Department in Florida conducting warrantless searches of barbershops in black and Latino neighborhoods. Here’s the headline on the Web site:
“Orlando Black Barber Shop Raids Remind Owners Of Slave Days.”
That’s an absurd assertion. None of those black barbershop owners has ever been a slave, so they can’t be “reminded” of something they’ve never lived through. Their ancestors were slaves, and would probably remind their whining descendants that they have advantages and rights slaves never had.
Here’s the back story: Over a three-month period this year, inspectors from Florida’s Department of Business and Professional Regulation inspected 40 barbershops in black and Latino neighborhoods. The inspectors’ job is to make sure barbers have valid licenses, and to check for adherence to health and safety codes. The inspectors are allowed to make unannounced spot checks.
All that would have been fine and dandy, except someone in the DBPR got this bright idea: “Hey,” this genius said, “let’s have sheriff’s deputies go along with us to search the barbers, the shops and, maybe a few customers for drugs and weapons.”
Much like drive-through prostate exams, it’s an idea whose time should never have come. But the black barbers didn’t need to whip out the slavery card. The Constitution card was in plain sight, waiting to be used.
A first-year law student could see what was so egregiously wrong with this operation. Apparently, no one in either the Orange County Sheriff’s Department or Florida’s DBPR has read the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
How do we count the ways the Orlando barbershop raids violated this amendment? I only have 10 fingers, but I’ll give it a shot.
» Effects are defined as “goods or possessions.” The “goods or possessions” in the Orlando raids are the barbershops, which are covered by the Fourth Amendment.
» “Unreasonable searches and seizures”: Searches have to be reasonable. Law enforcement officials tagging along with DBPR inspectors in hopes of finding something illegal doesn’t come within a light-year of being “reasonable.”
» “No Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause”: Was there probable cause for the search of the barbershops?
Back in the good old days, cops used to conduct covert drug buys using either undercover officers or informants. Cops would conduct surveillance of suspected drug dealers or establishments. Then they’d go before a judge, give information under oath and get a warrant.
Some of you may recognize the above procedures by a better term — good, old-fashioned policing. That seems to have been abandoned in Orange County, Fla., if this excerpt from a Reuters story is accurate:
“Authorities told the Orlando Sentinel in November that nine shops owned or frequented by African Americans and Hispanics were the raids’ actual targets, but the sheriff’s department expanded the inspections to other shops in the area to avoid the inference that anyone was being ‘targeted’ by the detail.”
Translation: We deliberately and flagrantly violated the Fourth Amendment — and targeted people who had broken no laws — because we felt like it. Where exactly in the Fourth Amendment is the “ignore this if you choose” clause?
Examiner Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.
