Life to not only serve as an example but also an inspiration and ultimately a pathway for his own career to help save the lives of other people. And thats the spirit of hope and resilience and community thats always carried america forward. We may disagree sometimes, especially here in washington but we do share a common vision for our future. We want an economy powered by the worlds best innovations. The best ideas. We want a country that extends the promise of opportunity for everybody whosle willing to work for us. We want to have a nation in which the accidents and circumstances of our birth arent determining our fate. And that if were born with a particular disease or a particular genetic makeup that makes us more vulnerable to something, that thats not our destiny. Thats not our fate. That we can remake it. Thats who we are as americans. And thats the power of scientific discovery. And we want bills generation and the generations that come after to inherit that most extraordinary gift that anybody can imagine and that is not just a chance to live a long and happy and healthy life in this greatest country on earth but also the chance to remake that world, continuously in ways that provide great promise for future generations. So im very excited about this. I hope you are too. Thank you everybody. God bless you. God bless the utnited states. Lets get to work. This by the way is dna for those of you who arent familiar with it. [ applause ] on the next washington journal, Political Correspondent looks at Campaign Strategies for the 2016 elections including the 1 billion dollars predicted to be spent by the Koch Brothers and industry, government and wreck Recreational Use of drones and dennis shaw, talks about efforts to regulate pay day loans and we will be taking your calls and you can join the conversation at facebook and twitter. Washington journal, live at 7 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan. Here are some of the our featured programs for this weekend on the cspan networks. On book tv saturday night at 10 00, on afterwards White House Correspondent for american radio april ryan on her more than 25 years in journalism and her coverage of three president ial administrations and sunday at noon on in depth, our three hour conversation with Walter Isaacson whos biographies include ben franklin, albert ien stien and the International Bestseller on steve jobs and on American History tv on cspan 3 saturday at 6 00 p. M. Eastern on the civil war. Boston College History professor Heather Cox Richardson on how the cowboy became symbolic of a newly unified america on sunday at 6 00 we will tour the house that was the headquarters of the American Red Cross and learn about its founder. Let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. Call us at 2026263400. Email us comments cspan. Org. Join the cspan conversation. Like us on facebook. Follow us on twitter. Keep track of the Republican Led Congress and follow its new members through its first session on cspan cspan 2, cspan radio and cspan. Org. The Supreme Court recently heard a case regarding the length of time the police can conduct a traffic stop. Once an officer issues a ticket or warning for a traffic infraction, drivers should be allowed to leave. The Justice Department argue police should be able to extend the traffic stop for a reasonable amount of time. This is an hour. With your argument next this morning in case 139972 rodriguez versus the united states. Mr. Oconnor. Mr. Chief justice, it may please the court the big issue that starts in this case that whether after completing the task related to a traffic stop whether an officer without individualized suspicion can hold the driver for a dog sniff specific question in this case is whether officer strubel was entitled to piggy back an already completed Traffic Offense with probable cause onto that Traffic Offense for an investigation of mr. Rodriguez involving nothing more than a hunch. That is the question of the case. But that remains that wasnt reached by the court of appeals. The District Court as you pointed out rejected the argument that there was probable cause saying its nothing more than a hunch but that was not reviewed by the court of appeals so that could still be open. The decision of the court of appeals your honor absolutely. That was a dimimus ruling. They did not reach the question as to whether there was reasonable suspicion and left it just based on their ruling of whether in fact this was a diminus action. Counsel, do you concede that this would be all right if the dog sniff took place during the traffic stop. In other words lets say there were two policemen there already, one says im going to write you a ticket and while thats taking place the other policeman walks around with the dog. No problem with that. There would be no problem mr. Chief justice if in fact all of that was done before the traffic ticket was written. If in fact the dog was taken around the car prior to the completion of the traffic stop and the ticket then of course, it would be all right. Mr. Oconnor, its frequent that a policeman when he stops somebody for broken tail light or whatever will conduct some other inquiries. You know where are you going . Ask a lot of questions. He will check whether the person is is driving a stolen car. Whether the person is properly licensed. All of that has nothing to do with a broken tail light and yet thats permitted right . Would it be permitted if he did it after he wrote the ticket . At that point in time, no. Is that right . He can only do that before he writes the ticket . If what if hes not giving a ticket. Hes just going to give him a warning . He says to them, you shouldnt have done that and you went a little bit over the line. Be careful next time. By the way let me see your drivers license. That would be bad . Yes, your honor. That twould be because that would be part of the stop. All of those questions would be once the stop is finished then he should be allowed to go no matter what the question was. Is it your argument that as soon as all of the steps that must be taken in connection with the traffic stop are completed, then the stop must end or is it that nothing more can be done after the ticket is issued . In other words is it the length of time or is it the formal act of giving the ticket or the warning that cuts things off . It is the formal act once the traffic stop is done which would be the reason which would be the purpose for the stop once that is done that is the when that is done is not clear. Two questions in Justice Scalias hypothetical the officer said im not going to give you a ticket but i just want to ask you a few questions, it seems to me that under your argument those questions are im imimim imimim impermissible impermissible, he says i have finished writing the ticket, i am going to giver you this ticket but im first going to go back and see if my radio check has come in to verify your license plates. Is that permitted . If this is the end of the traffic stop. It is not. But first of all these are hypotheticals that have a wrong preassumption,sumptionpresumption. Those include checking for warrants checking for tickets on the car checking identity, asking questions about that and generally with with identity, it also has to do with where are you going and where are you coming from correct. Yes, your honor. All right. Justice sotomayor. My question for you and it cant be the formal act of writing the ticket, it has to be the formal it has to be the acts related to the mission when you finish those, thats when the stop ends. Yes your honor. That is exactly right. Yeah but youve tied it to just writing and handing over the ticket or not even doing that. Youre staying just writing the ticket which is crazy. If in fact thats the impression that i gave. That is wrong. It is not the formal handing of the ticket. It is when the stop is complete. Once the justification for the stop and the purpose is complete, the ticket is done whether it is a warning, whether it is handed to them at some point in time, the ticket is done. Thats the investigation. Justice sotomayors question assumes and you apparently embrace the assumption that checking on whether you have a proper license, checking whether the car is stolen, all of those things are embraced within the mission when the only basis for the stop is you have a broken tail light. How is it that have anything to do with a broken tail light. Those are things your honor that have been accepted as part of the process. I see. Well, maybe dog sniffing should be too right . Dog sniffing is accepted so long as it is done before what before completion of the mission. Which includes not just the broken tail light but also inquiring into your license, inquiring into prior arrests. Thats all part of the mission. Yes, your honor. Why wont you make the dog sniff part of the mission and that will solve the problem . Part of the mission when you stop somebody is not just the broken tail light but, you know, whether the car is stolen. Whether you have drugs in the car so lets bring in a car and do the car sniff. Youre willing to expand the mission to do everything up to but not beyond the dog sniff. Why do you do that . You expand the mission your honor for everything that comes within the task that are part of the traffic stop. The dog sniff its a broken tail light. Thats the only thing that comes within the traffic stop. All the rest is added on and you let them add it on. Why dont you let them add on the dog sniff. You do so long as it occurs before the ticket is delivered, is that right. You do if its done before the traffic stop is done. The ticket would not be do you see the problem is how do you define the traffic stop. Youve already indicated that the traffic stop can include some of the questions. Youre really i think much better off if you stick with the former rule. Once you hand the ticket thats the end of it. Then you have a formal rule. Youre not arguing that. That leads us open to the question why cant we include the dog sniff. Well its a policy question. So answer it as a policy question. Dont tie it to the stop or not. Tie it to something else. As a policy question, if you could end it with the handing of the ticket, that would be acceptable. If we tie if we tie the traffic ticket as the end of the justification for the stop. Its okay to have a dog sniff so long as its before the ticket is issued then every Police Officers other than those who are uninformed or incompetent will deliver the handing over of the ticket until the dog sniff is completed so what does that accomplish . Its great for your client but what does it do for the law . Your honor, i think what it does first if you have officers that wait if thats the question your honor, if they wait to put the ticket if we adopt a formal rule. Thats one of the options once you hand over the ticket, thats it. You cant do anything more. The person has to be allowed to go, all right. Is that your argument or not. That is your argument. Then what does that accomplish . It accomplishes is the enforcement of the Fourth Amendment. Once the stop is done, once the purpose is done, the justification is done. The the question is is this very just the easiest thing to get around by simply saying the sequence in which i will do this. I wont think of issuing the ticket until ive had the dog sniff. So thats the problem. What are you accomplishing say we make the handing over of the ticket the end of the legitimate stop well then the police can just say im going to defer that a few minutes until the dog sthif sniff occurs. It just means that youre not going to accomplish any protection for individuals if thats your position that if its just a question of when you do it so if you do it during the stop, before the ticket is issued, its okay. If you do it two minutes after it, its not okay. Your honor, it is okay when the traffic stop is done. When the mission is complete. You cant possibly mean that. You cant possibly mean that. The stopping officer says yeah, im done. I got my ticket here. Its all written out. However before i give it to you i want to have a dog sniff. Im going to call in to headquarters, they are going to send down a dog. Its going to take maybe 45 minutes. You just sit there because the traffic stop is not terminated till i give you your ticket. Youre going to allow that. Well, again, the formal handing of the ticket is not the end. In your example in your example he hasnt turned over the ticket yet. He says im not going to give you the ticket until the dog comes. Thats going to take 45 minutes. Thats okay. No, the traffic stop is done. Whether he hands the ticket to him at that point in time. He has not handed the ticket over. He has kept the ticket. And the reason that he has kept the ticket is for the dog to come. But that is past the that is mastpast the traffic stop. Youre not applying a formal test. I thought you were saying its a formal test. When you deliver the ticket is the Termination Point but thats not right. So what is the test . The formal test how long a normal stop would take . The formal test no, your honor. That would not be the case at all. The formal test is when the mission has been accomplished. If you pull someone over for the Traffic Offense. And in if fact you do all of the tasks that are necessary to complete it. When it is completed, it is done. What if the officer says, i need to think about this for a while. The officer says i need to think about this for a while. Im going to go back. I am going to ponder how long it took you. I am going to think about other tickets that i have given in the past. The dogs are going to be here in eight to ten minutes. I need that to think about it. Is that okay because he has not written the ticket. He waits till he has thought about it for a while to write the ticket. No, your honor. Thats not okay at all. What has to happen is the officer must be diligent. He must be diligent going towards the investigation of the traffic stop. Again, i think were putting if i am the one of the misleadingly of the this, i apologyize apologize. Handing of the ticket is not the endall. Handing of the ticket is the task thats done. I got pulled over for a driving offense, then it is over. In your example mr. Chief justice, good hes pondering, then hes not being diligent. If hes pondering, and not being diligent. Gee we ponder all the time and we think were being diligent. Pondering is not diligent. Unless the pondering is to avoid the diligence. That would be the question. The question is therefore if in fact the officer is pondering the ticket he says im going to wait until the dog comes you are then extending the time of the stop and it violates the rule that you have you know im not sure. Can he ask for the registration usually when yourestoned edstopped he asked for the license and registration. Well, whats pertinent about it is it is part of the traffic stop not only do you have the driver but youre looking at the driver, the drivers history the car. All of those things are part and partial to the task towards the offense. If you saw the car swerve what does that have to do with the car. The car was just doing with what the driver did. I dont see why you need the registration of the car. What you can do mr. Chief justice, i think you do. I think that is part of the investigating the Traffic Offense. Those are things that have been accepted and accepted might not be the right word. Adopted as things that you can do in a traffic stop. Now, there are certainly times when you go beyond the traffic stop and you have the johnson case, if in fact, you go beyond the traffic stop, even measurably beyond it then you have violated the drivers rights and it is unconstitutional. The question in that case occurred during the traffic stop. Mr. Oconnor, is this particular Traffic Violation, was that an arrestable offense . No. Under nebraska law, no it was not. Its a traffic infraction. Because it was an arrestable offense, they could arrest the driver and then impound the car and do an inventory search. If it was an arrestable offense, yes, your honor. I think thats correct. But youre saying its not an arrestable offense. It is not and regardless, i mean he was see here is what we do know about this case. Not only do we know the mission is done because of the tasks that were completed. You have the officer that says, i have done the task, everything that needs to be done with this offense with this traffic stop is finished. Its finished. Theres no question about that. Then theres no more justification. In order for the driver to continue to be detained there must be new justification or consent which you did not get in this case but you must let the driver go because you are at the end, you are finished with the traffic stop. You are finished with the reason that he was detained in the first place. The purpose going across the fog lines. Can i ask you a simple question. Yes, weve permitted a dog search but in the cases that we have, sobalace and others, it was done siemmultaneous with the traffic stop, correct. Correct. You said in your brief, a dog sniff is not a police entitlement to which the Fourth Amendment limits have been. Is there a line that we should draw at how long citizens should be kept by the side of the road . I think that the all right. So announce what that line is. Thats what i think everybody is has been asking you. The line is i can start off with perhaps the johnson case again. When the stop is basically when the stop is done. Why dont you just do a simple test. If youre going to do a stop, you cant reasonably extend or pass the time it takes to deal with the ticket correct . That would be the simple rule . I think that the simple rule if i may propose one is the same one that professor lafave has per proposed. The officer sees the infraction. The officer pulls the person over. The officer tells the person what the infraction is. He does the license, registration, runs the car. When that is done, he gives them the ticket, the warning ticket. That is end of the traffic stop. Theres no other reason to hold the person after that point in time. You say he runs the car, he puts the license plate into the radio and waits from the report from the station as to whether or not the license is okay. Yes, you