News Release

March 17, 2004

Media Contact: (202) 789-5200

Supreme Court to hear landmark privacy case Monday
Cato legal experts available to comment on the implications of the Hiibel case

WASHINGTON--The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, March 22, is scheduled to hear a constitutional challenge to a Nevada law that requires individuals to identify themselves to police officers. The case involves Dudley Hiibel, a Nevada rancher, who was standing beside his parked truck smoking a cigarette when a police officer pulled over and demanded to see his identification. When Hiibel declined, he was arrested for "failure to cooperate."

According to the friend-of-the-court brief (pdf) filed by the Cato Institute, the case offers the Court the "opportunity to declare a clear, simple and just rule of law: An American citizen cannot lose his liberty for simply declining to speak with a police officer."

"This case raises profound questions regarding the power of government and the constitutional rights of the citizenry," says Timothy Lynch, director of Cato's Project on Criminal Justice, who co-wrote the amicus brief with attorney Christine Klein. "Hiibel, like most Americans, believed that he had a right to decline to answer questions posed by police officers. But when Hiibel invoked his 'right to remain silent' he was arrested and taken to jail."

"Everyone knows that the Constitution protects the right of individuals to speak," he adds. "With the Hiibel case, the Supreme Court will soon decide whether the government can criminalize citizen silence."

The legal precedent ultimately set in this case could have implications for all Americans, not just residents of Nevada. Lynch asks: "Can it really be a crime for a citizen to quietly decline to answer questions?"