In that case, the Indiana Supreme Court found that the roadblock at issue was not constitutional.
Not entirely certain you are correct. Not entirely certain I am either, though. In the case cited the Supreme Court apparently suppressed the evidence. However, the language in the decision seems to state that the checkpoints don’t breach the 4th Amendment rights of an individual and are permissible when conducted under reasonable circumstances. (Whatever that is)
Curious then, that the PSA that has been posted to make the public aware of the upcoming checkpoint states the checkpoint is “legal” based on the very same court case. (State vs Gershoff)
So. . . . . at this point, although I still don’t disagree with the premise of catching impaired drivers, I am still convinced it can easily become a fishing expedition when a DL and registration must be provided.
One thing that is curious is that a checkpoint where 80+ people were stopped, 14 were arrested for OWI infraction and another 30 were given a warning for seat belt or child restraint violations. Depending on the level of the aggressive nature of the officers, it could easily become not just just an OWI activity but a revenue enhancer for the community as well.
I have no desire to be involved in a traffic accident where an impaired driver is the cause. Conversely, I also have no desire to have to “show my papers” when I am not committing, have not committed, or not about to commit a crime.
YMMV