“Court rules in favor of Scott Randolph; Split Supreme Court decision settles police search question raised here in 2001”: This article appears today in The Americus (Ga.) Times-Recorder.
Today in The Washington Post, Charles Lane has a front page article headlined “High Court Trims Police Power to Search Homes.”
In The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage reports that “A Combative High Court Limits Searches of Homes; A co-tenant can negate consent, it rules; Chief justice bitingly dissents.”
In USA Today, Joan Biskupic has an article headlined “Court: No police search if one resident says ‘yes,’ other ‘no.’”
In The Houston Chronicle, Patty Reinert reports that “Police home searches require consent by all; In a 5-3 split, new chief justice’s dissent based on domestic abuse is called ‘red herring.’”
And The Washington Times reports that “Divided justices reject searches if consent is split.”
Posted at 7:10 AM by Howard Bashman
