Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
427 bytes added ,  01:17, August 17, 2015
There are two competing views of the Fourth Amendment
Line 1: Line 1:  
The '''{{PAGENAME}}''' to the [[United States Constitution]] states:
 
The '''{{PAGENAME}}''' to the [[United States Constitution]] states:
 
{{cquote|'''The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no [[warrant]]s shall issue, but upon [[probable cause]], supported by [[oath]] or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'''}}
 
{{cquote|'''The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no [[warrant]]s shall issue, but upon [[probable cause]], supported by [[oath]] or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'''}}
 +
 +
There are two competing views of the Fourth Amendment.  One view, championed by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] and grounded in pre-American [[English law]], is that the Fourth Amendment is based in the protection of [[private property]].  The other view, held by roughly half of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], or more depending on the facts, is that the Fourth Amendment protects important intangible rights beyond private property.
    
==Supreme Court Rules Police Can Violate The 4th Amendment (If They Are Ignorant Of The Law)==
 
==Supreme Court Rules Police Can Violate The 4th Amendment (If They Are Ignorant Of The Law)==
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,203

edits

Navigation menu