What did the Whren decision by the Supreme Court enable police to do?

The Whren decision, delivered by the Supreme Court in 1996, established that police officers may make a traffic stop when they observe a minor violation, even if the actual motivation for the stop is to investigate other criminal activity. This ruling affirmed that the "objective" standard for reasonable suspicion applies in these scenarios, meaning that as long as there is a valid traffic violation, the police are legally justified in initiating a stop.

This decision essentially enhances the powers of law enforcement by allowing them to conduct stops based purely on observable conduct that violates traffic laws, without needing further justification if they later investigate other potential crimes. The ruling emphasized that subjective motives of law enforcement, concerning investigations related to drug use or other offenses, do not invalidate a stop that is legally justified by the existence of a traffic infraction. This broadens law enforcement's capabilities in detaining individuals during routine traffic enforcement.

In contrast, other options involve concepts like limiting the scope of traffic stops, requiring warrants, or discussing funding issues, which are not directly related to the judicial principles established by the Whren case.