A Stitch in Haste

Anyone remember Hiibel v. Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004). It wasn't that long ago.

Here are some people who definitely forgot Hiibel:

The Ohio Patriot Act has made it to [Governor Bob] Taft's desk, and with the stroke of a pen, it would most likely become the toughest terrorism bill in the country. The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.

In Hiibel, the Supreme Court ruled that an individual who, as part of a lawful stop by police given probable cause (or the lower standard of "reasonable suspicion") must disclose his identity -- not "provide identification," but simply disclose (truthfully of course) his identity.

The Court made it very clear that Hiibel presumed a lawful police stop, and explicitly reaffirmed an earlier case, Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (1979), holding that police may not "just stop someone" and demand that they identify themselves "because they looked suspicious."

And the proposed Ohio Patriot Act doesn't even require the "they looked suspicious" part.

Anyone, anywhere, for any reason, or for no reason whatsoever: "Identify yourself!"

Next step: "Papers please!"

Patently unconstitutional under Brown v. Texas. No question. Not even close.

But pass it anyway, Ohio Legislature. Sign it anyway, Governor Taft.

Those "activist judges" will be there waiting for it.

Hat tip to P2TP. More thoughts at Hammer of Truth.