October Term 2003 · Docket 02-1060
Does the Fourth Amendment ban checkpoints that seek witnesses to a specific crime?
Illinois argues its witness checkpoint is legal. Lidster claims it violates the Fourth Amendment.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Gary Feinerman argued the checkpoint was designed to find witnesses to a specific crime.
Feinerman asked if the checkpoint is per se invalid or governed by a balancing test.
Feinerman noted that narcotics checkpoints were found invalid in a previous case.
Ramsell argued that mass suspicionless seizures violate the Fourth Amendment without exigent circumstances.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 43-60 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 43-60
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The Court must decide if a checkpoint seeking witnesses to a known crime is valid.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 5, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 43-60 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 43-60
What each side wants
Illinois wants the Court to uphold the checkpoint as a valid law enforcement tool.
Lidster wants the Court to strike down the checkpoint as an unconstitutional seizure.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
What each side says
Illinois argues the checkpoint is valid because it targets a specific known crime.
Lidster argues the checkpoint is invalid because it seizes people without individual suspicion.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case was submitted after the arguments concluded.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 43-60 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 43-60
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of police power to stop drivers for witness information. It shapes how states investigate hit-and-run accidents and other crimes. The outcome affects daily driving rights and public safety efforts.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 43-60 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 43-60
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 15-7 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 15-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-41
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.