I Really Believe That Roberts Is A Monster

Perhaps The Most Dangerous Man In America: "Roberts wrote, italicizing for emphasis, that the 'correct approach' to deciding the case was simple and obvious: 'The 4th Amendment protects privacy. If an individual shares information, papers or places with another, he assumes the risk that the other person will in turn share access to that information or those papers or places with the government.'

He called the rule set by Souter's majority 'arbitrary,' 'obscure' and 'random' because it depends on the co-owner's 'good luck' of being at the door when police arrive.

In a footnote, Souter fired back. 'In the dissent's view, the centuries of special protection for the privacy of the home are over,' he wrote. He derided Roberts' 'easy assumption that privacy shared with another individual is privacy waived for all purposes, including warrantless searches by the police.'

Roberts responded that 'it seems a bit overwrought to characterize' his approach as demolishing the privacy right considering that the majority had agreed that a homeowner asleep in the next room would not have had a privacy right to object to the search."

In my garden of horrors, he's third on the list behind asteroids and copyright laws.