Silver Supporter
Bronze Supporter
- Messages
- 4,279
- Reactions
- 7,080
None of which negates the regular, historical, and commonly accepted practice of inspecting (yes, even randomly) interstate commerce and the transport thereof (whether governmental OR private).I'd argue the 4th amendment specifically because this is UPS, a private business, and not a government entity like USPS. This is a fishing expedition without a license (warrant) because there exists no reasonable suspicion that the random packages they are inspecting contain contraband. If, however, a LE agency were to have credible intelligence on a package containing contraband, AND obtained a warrant, then I could see them searching for it in this manner. However, any contraband they discovered in the process that was not a part of the warrant would not be allowed as evidence against an unrelated party.
Without looking it up, I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS disagrees with me on this, but they're not always correct in their interpretations (see, "Chevron Doctrine").