Court to Rule on Passenger Searches : Judiciary: The case involving luggage on buses and trains will test whether conservatives are ready to increase police powers. Souter takes oath.

Shortly after swearing in David H. Souter as the ninth Supreme Court justice, the court announced that it would decide whether police may board buses and trains routinely to search for drugs in the bags of passengers.

The search and seizure case will test whether Souter and his conservative colleagues are ready to give the police new powers in the war on drugs.

In the past, the court has required that police have some evidence or suspicion of wrong-doing before they stop a traveler and search his bags. The prevailing rule for decades had been that random, routine searches violate the 4th Amendment’s ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

But in the push to combat illegal drugs, that rule is being whittled away. Last year, the court upheld the search of travelers who fit a “drug courier profile” on the grounds that these general traits give the police some basis for picking out suspicious persons. In June, the court also ruled that motorists may be stopped briefly at sobriety checkpoints. If the drivers who are stopped look intoxicated, officers can pull them over for further investigation.

In the case (Florida vs. Bostick, 89-1717), prosecutors are asking the high court to go one step further. They contend that police should be allowed to “routinely, but randomly” board buses and trains, question the passengers, and search their bags even if there is no reason to believe that a particular passenger is carrying drugs.

In November, the Florida Supreme Court in a strongly worded opinion ruled such searches illegal. “Roving patrols, random sweeps and arbitrary searches and seizures would go far to eliminate such (drug) crimes in this state,” the Florida court said. “Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Communist Cuba have demonstrated all too tellingly the effectiveness of such methods.”

The 4-3 decision threw out drug evidence obtained by officers who boarded buses and Amtrak trains at stopovers in Ft. Lauderdale and Palm Beach. State attorneys described the searches of passengers and their bags as voluntary, or “consensual encounters,” between the police and the travelers. But the state court disagreed, saying that passengers had no choice but to submit to the searches.

Prosecutors then appealed to the Supreme Court, noting that Florida “is a major pipeline for illegal drugs and thus a particularly critical area in the nation’s . . . efforts to combat drug smuggling.” In recent years, the high court has ruled regularly for prosecutors in drug cases and on Tuesday the justices announced that they would hear the state’s appeal. A ruling can be expected early next year.

For Souter, his first day began with the official oath required of federal judges. On Monday, Souter was at the White House where President Bush watched as he took the constitutional oath required of all federal employees. But Bush did not come for the court ceremony on Tuesday.

Standing alongside Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, Souter promised to “do equal right to the poor and to the rich.” He then shook hands with Justice Thurgood Marshall and moved down to his seat on the far right end of the bench.

On behalf of the court, Rehnquist told Souter: “I wish you a long and happy career in our common calling.”

With the new seating arrangement, the justices, starting from the left as seen from the courtroom are Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O’Connor, Harry A. Blackmun, Byron R. White, Rehnquist, Marshall, John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia and Souter.

After the five-minute ceremony, the court recessed briefly for what is a once-in-a-career moment for a Supreme Court justice: an official “photo opportunity” in front of the court. Rehnquist and Souter took the traditional walk down the marble steps, where a smiling Souter posed for the cameras.

Unlike the July day when President Bush introduced him to the nation--a moment when Souter says he was “in a state of virtual shock”--the new justice looked confident and at ease Tuesday.

“Hurry and load up,” he joked with photographers. “I’ve got to go to work.”

Recently, court aides had mused that the bookish bachelor might rent a room in the Library of Congress next door. Not true, Souter said, telling reporters that he had signed a lease on a Washington apartment.

After the photo session, he headed inside to hear four hours of oral arguments with the other justices.

Among other actions Tuesday, the court:

--Agreed to decide whether the nation’s private hospitals must recognize separate bargaining units for doctors, registered nurses, technical employees, maintenance workers, clerical employees and other professionals (AHA vs. NLRB, 90-97). The American Hospital Assn. says that this array of bargaining groups--mandated by the National Labor Relations Board--is causing work stoppages and hurting patient care around the nation. The hospitals want to consolidate employees into three bargaining units.

--Agreed to decide whether all Latinos can be excluded from a jury trying a Latino man for attempted murder (Hernandez vs. New York, 89-7645). The New York courts said that they can be excluded but the Supreme Court in 1986 ruled that all blacks could not be excluded from a jury trying a black defendant.