We must end the death penalty, once and for all.

On this World Day Against the Death Penalty, add your name to the growing number of people calling for an end to capital punishment.

The standard at issue is for detaining someone (albeit briefly), as the 4th Amendment does not bar police talking to people. But Kavanaugh's opinion extends the power to detain based on a combination of only factors like the person's race, the town where they live, and their job.

Now, again, I hope that Justice Kavanaugh in concurring does not represent the Fourth Amendment reasoning for the majority. But everyone should be concerned.

Read the dissent by Justice Sotomayor for more thorough analysis.
10/10

More importantly, he ignores that the case involved activities near the border, where the Court gives broader government powers and less Constitutional protections. But Noem v. Vasquez is not a border case and is not focused on being near the border but in Los Angeles.
9/10

Justice Kavanaugh does cite United States v. Brignoni-Ponce for that proposition, though in that case the Court said that ethnicity could not be the sole reason for a stop. . .
8/10

The other factors he lists, like "apparent ethnicity" and the person's job, seems to find reasonable suspicion justifying a stop only for activities relating to existing within the law.
7/10

But even under that low standard of Wardlow, he goes even lower, saying that reasonable suspicion may be based not on a small geographic area but on living in Los Angeles.
6/10