The U.S. Supreme Court case Kansas v. Glover, 2019, revolved around the legality of traffic stops based on assumptions about the owner's license status. The defendant, Charles Glover Jr., was pulled over by a police officer who recognized his vehicle and believed him to have a suspended license but did not confirm that he was driving before initiating the stop. Glover argued this violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures as there wasn't reasonable suspicion for the stop since it was based on an assumption rather than confirmed fact. However, in April 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kansas with an 8-1 decision stating that when lacking information negating an owner’s exclusive control of their vehicle or indicating someone else is driving - such as here where officers knew nothing about who was driving beyond make/model/color/location - it is reasonable for officers to infer that owners are drivers of their vehicles absent other circumstances giving rise to doubt.

In the dissenting opinion for Kansas v. Glover, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that the majority's decision disregards key components of the Fourth Amendment by allowing law enforcement to stop a vehicle based solely on an assumption without any investigative work or reasonable suspicion. She contended that this ruling allows police officers to make stops based on nothing more than database errors or uncorroborated hunches, which could disproportionately affect low-income individuals who may have difficulty maintaining their licenses due to financial constraints. Furthermore, she expressed concern about potential misuse and abuse of such power by law enforcement agencies. The justice emphasized that while public safety is important, it should not come at the expense of individual rights and liberties protected under the Constitution.