In Scott v. Harris, the Court held 8-1 that when a car chase poses a “substantial and immediate risk” of injury to others, a police officer was acting reasonably when he terminated the chase by bumping the driver off the road. Justice Stevens didn’t agree with the Court and included this juicy bit in his dissent:

I can only conclude that my colleagues were unduly frightened by two or three images on the tape that looked like bursts of lightning or explosions, but were in fact merely the headlights of vehicles zooming by in the opposite lane. Had they learned to drive when most high- speed driving took place on two-lane roads rather than on superhigh- ways—when split-second judgments about the risk of passing a slow- poke in the face of oncoming traffic were routine—they might well have reacted to the videotape more dispassionately.

If you have time, the whole dissent is pretty interesting.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • Four 8-1 Decisions in One Day: The Supreme Court released four opinions today, and each was 8-1. You can find all of the opinions here. CompuCredit v. Greenwood, a case...
  • First Opinion Stats: As we wait for the first opinion of the term, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at the first signed opinion released in recen...
  • Updated Term Charts: Starting this week, I'll be posting my updated charts on SCOTUSblog. You can find the first SB version of my charts here. More spec...
  • Traitors to the Cause: 6-3 decisions are, statistically speaking, the least common vote split. Frequently, those cases split along the ideological lines that are s...
  • Likelihood of a Petition Being Granted: There are a lot of numbers thrown out about the likelihood of a cert. petition being granted. The number I've always heard is 1%, but I some...