But not too smart. He got as upset when he sued for his constitutional rights being violated that the court focused only on that issue, and not whether the policy made sense.
It's hard to sue on behalf of the public rather than oneself; courts often punt by creating or invoking balancing tests that are fundamentally arbitrary. I'm not at all sure the policy does make sense; it's not well-supported by data, and it seems to me that the only people who benefit from constraining the average intelligence level of cops are corrupt administrators. After all, it's much easier to govern if you have assistants with a lot of leverage but little initiative.
You can only sue if you have been harmed. His suit wasn't that stupid cops hurt him - it was that he was treated unfairly. But he was treated the same as anyone else and the people reason he was excluded was considered reasonable enough to be a question of public policy (not the courts job)
