Court to Rule on Sobriety Checkpoints : U.S. Justices to Review Mich. Decisions That Halted Roadside Stops

WASHINGTON —  The Supreme Court today agreed to decide whether police nationwide can try to curb drunk driving by stopping motorists at sobriety checkpoints.

The justices said they will review Michigan court rulings that struck down that state’s sobriety checkpoint program as an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.

Courts in other states, including California, have upheld checkpoint programs.

Michigan state police first used sobriety checkpoints, modeled after a program used in Maryland, in 1986.

Average Delay 30 Seconds

At a checkpoint site, police directed all traffic headed in one direction to a roadside area where officers checked motorists for signs of intoxication.

If there was no immediate evidence of intoxication, the motorist was given a traffic safety brochure and allowed to drive away. The average delay was about 30 seconds.

If some signs of intoxication were detected, a driver was directed to another area for further questioning and perhaps a breath test.

At one such checkpoint, Michigan state police troopers checked 126 vehicles in less than an hour and detained two drivers for sobriety field tests. One driver was arrested on drunk-driving charges.

The state police were sued soon after the checkpoint program began. The lawsuit alleged that the checkpoints violated the Fourth Amendment’s ban on unreasonable police searches and seizures.

Appeals Court Ruling

A state judge and a state appeals court ruled that the checkpoint program is unconstitutional. The appeals court cited “the potential for an unreasonable subjective intrusion on individual liberty interests.”

The Michigan Supreme Court on Feb. 22 refused to review the lower court rulings.

In other action today, the court:

--Agreed to decide whether public employers can be forced to put aside partisanship when hiring, promoting and transferring workers. The court said it will hear an appeal by two men and a woman who said their job status suffered because they did not support the Republican Party in Illinois.

--Let states file criminal charges against employers accused of neglecting the health and safety of workers. The court, without comment, let stand a ruling in an Illinois case that federal workplace regulations do not bar such state prosecutions.

--Refused to enter a dispute involving crowding at California’s San Quentin prison where convicts complained of cruel and unusual punishment stemming from double celling and increased prisoner violence. The justices, without comment, rejected an appeal brought by the prisoners against Gov. George Deukmejian and state corrections officials.

--Refused to hear an appeal by San Francisco policemen who say they lost out on promotions due to unfair preferences given to women and minorities. The court let stand a ruling that the officers, mostly white men, are not the victims of reverse bias who are entitled to promotions.

Dayton Hudson heiress wins case, Page 2.