Justices OK strip searches for any crime

WASHINGTON -- Jailers may perform invasive strip searches on people arrested even for minor offenses, an ideologically divided Supreme Court ruled yesterday, the conservative majority declaring that security trumps privacy in an often dangerous environment.

In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled against a New Jersey man who was strip-searched in two county jails following his arrest on a warrant for an unpaid fine that he had, in reality, paid.

The decision resolved a conflict among lower courts about how to balance security and privacy. Before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, lower courts generally prohibited routine strip searches for minor offenses.

In recent years, however, courts have allowed jailers more discretion to maintain security, and the high court ruling ratified those decisions.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said Albert Florence's entry into the general jail population gave guards the authorization to force him to strip naked and expose his mouth, nose, ears and genitals to a visual search in case he was hiding anything.

"Courts must defer to the judgment of correctional officials unless the record contains substantial evidence showing their policies are an unnecessary or unjustified response to problems of jail security," Kennedy said.

In a dissenting opinion joined by the court's liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer said strip searches improperly "subject those arrested for minor offenses to serious invasions of their personal privacy." Breyer said jailers ought to have a reasonable suspicion someone may be hiding something before conducting a strip-search.