The issue before the justices was one that has long caused confusion in state courts: whether the police can search a home without a warrant if one occupant gives consent but another occupant, who is physically present, says ‘no.’ The majority held today that at least under some circumstances, such a search is invalid….
Justice Souter, [writing for the majority,] said a finding for Mr. Randolph — in the specific circumstances that marked this case, Georgia v. Randolph, No. 04-1067 — was compelled by Fourth Amendment principles against unreasonable searches and seizures. But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the main dissenter, bitterly disagreed, as he and Justice Souter exchanged darts in writing.” (New York Times )
Even though the case went (IMHO) the right way, the heated disputation does not bode well for some of the other contentious issues facing the Roberts Court, especially as Alito (who was not on the Court when this arguments in this case were heard) begins to join the deliberations.
