| Libertarian Party of NY -- On the Border Checkpoints in Essex County, NY |
|
Problems at the I-87 Checkpoint Another fatal crash at the border (9/20/04) Quebec bus crashes at US Border Patrol checkpoint
So they have improved the road warnings...
Related Links
The town of El Cenizo speaks up against the local burden of Border Checkpoints. (near the end of the article)
 |
The War Comes to Essex County, NY
two of them, actually...There's a fixed-place Border Patrol checkpoint on I-87 within the legal 100-mile limit of the Canadian border in Essex County, NY. The Border Patrol officers have a drug dog named Kirza with them sometimes, sniffing every car to go by, and any finds are passed along to the state police. People charged in the national war on terrorism are referred to Homeland Security. People charged in the national war on drugs are referred to local courts in Essex County.
Essex County is starting to be affected. The New York Times is taking notice.
Update: It's gotten so bad that the Essex County Public Defender has resigned. Story from the Press-Republican.
WOKR reports: North Hudson: Roadblock Causing Hardships This program is putting hundreds of extra people into the judicial system in Essex county each year.
Essex County taxpayers are having to pay to prosecute these people, as well as defending many of them with a public defender, and put them up in jail when convicted, all because of Federal border and drug enforcement in their county. The county is poor, relatively, but that's not the only toll it takes.
Tourists returning from Northern NY vacation spots like Lake Placid, the High Peaks, and upper Lake Champlain will routinely encounter Homeland Security on their way home this summer.
Border Patrol thought that people might be trying to elude the checkpoint, so they now often have officers in marked and unmarked cars watching cars getting off the exit. Now locals are getting caught up in them, and everyone is starting to question the practice.
Is this legal?
The ACLU are getting involved. They might rely on "Indianapolis v. Edmond" (SCOTUS) which threw out (non-border-related) drug checkpoints--it's a great case for us, and one of the few to uphold any aspect of the fourth amendment for drivers!
(Now-resigned) Essex County Public Defender Mark Montanye thinks that the issue of this particular checkpoint will go to the Supreme Court.
The trained drug dog does not deal with an issue of immediate public danger, like DWI checkpoints do, Drug interdiction, holds Indianapolis v Edmond, is an issue of routine crime enforcement.
Random stops without cause are prohibited, but once a car is stopped for any slight but valid reason, the driver's and passengers' rights erode rapidly from there. 'Roving' checkpoints have more restrictions than fixed ones. There is also a special class of checkpoints when looking for a suspect of a recently-committed crime in the area.
Fixed checkpoints with good signage have been endorsed by the Supreme Court for two primary reasons so far: border-patrol issues, and immediate danger to drivers, such as sobriety checkpoints. They also slip registration checks into the category (Deleware v Prouse) on the theory that registration is done to promote safety, and an unregistered car is probably a more dangerous vehicle.
Having the Feds ask for identification papers, or having to let their narcotics dog sniff the car just because someone gets off the exit before the checkpoint ISN'T constitutional. It isn't probable cause that they are eluding the checkpoint. Probable cause is still needed for the stop (seizure), even if the dog's sniff is only defined as a seizure, not a search, per Indianpolis.
U.S. v Martinez clearly distinguishes a fixed checkpoint from roving ones...they haven't yet made an exception for roving ones NEAR a fixed checkpoint, especially when there is significant traffic in the area that did NOT cross the border at all.
LPNY Home
