551 U.S. 249 (2007)
Brendlin v. California is a cornerstone Fourth Amendment case that resolves a recurring question in everyday policing: when officers stop a car, are the passengers seized, too?
Is a passenger in a vehicle seized for Fourth Amendment purposes when police conduct a traffic stop, thereby permitting the passenger to challenge the legality of the stop?
A person is seized under the Fourth Amendment when an officer, by physical force or show of authority, restrains the person's liberty such that a reasonable person would not feel free to terminate the encounter. During a traffic stop, this restraint applies to all occupants: a passenger, no less than the driver, is seized from the moment the vehicle is stopped. Accordingly, a passenger may challenge the constitutionality of the stop and seek suppression of evidence as fruit of that seizure.
Yes. A traffic stop seizes both the driver and the passenger for Fourth Amendment purposes. A passenger may therefore challenge the legality of the stop. The judgment of the California Supreme Court was reversed and the case remanded.
Brendlin definitively establishes that passengers have Fourth Amendment rights at stake in traffic stops and may seek suppression when a stop is unlawful. The decision harmonizes day-to-day policing with the seizure doctrine by recognizing that the show of authority in pulling over a car necessarily restrains passengers. For students, the case clarifies two exam-critical points: (1) a passenger can challenge the stop itself even if they lack a privacy interest in the vehicle; and (2) Fourth Amendment "standing" is not a freestanding doctrine but a merits inquiry into whether the government violated the defendant's own rights. Brendlin pairs with cases like Whren, Mimms, Wilson, and Rodriguez to frame modern traffic-stop analysis.