>I think they got this wrong. When I read about this a few days ago it jogged my memory about a lawsuit in south Florida from 3 or 4 years ago. Little googlin & I found it.
>
>http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2008-06-16/news/0806150223_1_strip-searched-settlement-crimes
>..as it turns out they did pay out a BUNCH of $ for this.
>
>...so I suppose this Supreme Court ruling will over-ride that?

That was a settlement so no the ruling doesn't override it, however, the door is now open to police policies allowing strip-searches of anyone entering "general" population.

>>I'm not sure if this was already posted but just in case you missed it, the Supreme Court has completely done away with the 4th amendment.
>>
>>The Supreme Court ruled Monday that jailers may subject people arrested for minor offenses to invasive strip searches, siding with security needs over privacy rights.
>>http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/04/supreme_court_upholds_jails_st.html
>>
>>4th Amendment : The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
>>
>>Franklin : They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.