Originally Posted by
PTravel
As a lawyer, I go through courthouse security quite often. Given the number of incidents of violence in courtrooms, I don't mind it at all. Of course, courthouse security is conducted by LEOs, as opposed to TSOs. Accordingly, I find them professional, courteous, efficient and not overly intrusive. More to the point, they use common sense -- no bare-arm pat downs at courthouses.
As for the legality of courthouse searches, I have no idea -- I've never researched it. I don't imagine, however, wanting to not submit to a search to enter a courtroom is going to be regarded as credible grounds for failing to report for jury duty.
Of the incidents of violence in courtrooms, how many are initiated by jurors? Parties to a case are often there because they have "issues"... But jurors are persons off the street, selected at random, with no more tendency to commit crimes than any other citizen.
As far as failing to report because of being denied entry for failing to submit to a search, what would such a juror be charged with? Would not a police officer physically denying entry be a valid excuse? Or is failure to consent to a search a crime itself? If the latter is the case, what is the point of "consent" at all?
To take it further, if a court can randomly select a person and compel him to submit to a search, can t force him to have his body scanned or his genitals rubbed? Can it compel him to undergo a drug test? Or a polygraph? I don't know the answers to these questions, but I think that such questions should be asked.