Is an anonymous tip a good enough reason for police to pull your car over? According to the U.S. Supreme Court, yes.  

This week, the court ruled in Prado Navarette v. California that an anonymous 911 call provides enough reasonable suspicion for police to stop a driver.

The case revolved around a 2008 California incident, where a 911 call was placed to report road rage, describing the pickup truck responsible. When police pulled over the matching truck, they found 30 pounds of marijuana and arrested driver Jose Prado Navarette, also accused of driving drunk by the 911 caller. Navarette sued the department, arguing that police did not have reasonable suspicion to stop and search his truck because the 911 call was anonymous and could have been anyone making any story up. 

However, five of the nine justices thought that police did have reasonable suspicion, opening the gate for anonymous callers to create a reason for drivers to be stopped. However, the court pointed out, 911 calls can be tracked. The opinion of the court, written by Justice Thomas, maintained that officers can judge for themselves a phone call's legitimacy on a case by case basis. 

Justice Antonin Scalia of the dissenting opinion called the decision "freedom destroying" and argued that "malevolent" tipsters could call in to have any car stopped. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan agreed with Scalia. Some of those "malevolent" tipsters could be racially profiling drivers, giving police an 'unreasonable' suspicion. 

"Drunken driving is a serious matter," Scalia wrote, "But so is the loss of our freedom to come and go as we please without police interference."