|
What this ruling essentially says is that if there is a restraining i order in place, that police are not required to act as a personal bodyguard for the person who requested the order. Instead that if somebody violates a court order, such as a restraining order, and there is sufficient evidence to show that said person the order, that they have the option of arresting them for it. All the supreme court did was clarify the what was written into federal law. They also gave the states the option to require police to protect people who have requested and been granted such orders, but seriously, think about the logistics of doing so. Should we hire police officers to act as personal bodyguards to these people?
|