Changes

Justice Holmes also dissented, but not because he felt that the Fourth Amendment protected against unlawful wiretaps. Using a principle of judicial economy, Justice Holmes did not reach the constitutional issue. His dissent proposed that evidence obtained unlawfully, should be excluded, a view that was echoed in Mapp v. Ohio. <ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=367&page=643 Mapp v. Ohio - opinion]</ref>

Justice Holmes also dissented, but not because he felt that the Fourth Amendment protected against unlawful wiretaps. Using a principle of judicial economy, Justice Holmes did not reach the constitutional issue. His dissent proposed that evidence obtained unlawfully, should be excluded, a view that was echoed in Mapp v. Ohio. <ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=367&page=643 Mapp v. Ohio - opinion]</ref>

Justice Brandeis's dissent invoked "man's spiritual nature," but the media prefer to quote his statement that the Constitution confers "the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." Justice Brandeis provided no authority for his sweeping claim, which seem odd in the context of blatant criminal activity. Do those engaging in crime have a "right to be let alone"? Justice Douglas, in concurring with the pro-abortion decision of ''[[Doe v. Bolton]]'', 410 U.S. 179 (1973), relied on Brandeis's sweeping assertion; so did Justice [[Harry Blackmun]] in writing that there is a constitutional right to [[homosexual]] activity in ''[[Bowers v. Hardwick]]'', 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

Justice Brandeis's dissent invoked "man's spiritual nature," but the media prefer to quote his statement that the Constitution confers "the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." Justice Brandeis provided no authority for his sweeping claim, which seem odd in the context of blatant criminal activity. Do those engaging in crime have a "right to be let alone"? Justice Douglas, in concurring with the pro-[[abortion]] decision of ''[[Doe v. Bolton]]'', 410 U.S. 179 (1973), relied on Brandeis's sweeping assertion; so did Justice [[Harry Blackmun]] in writing that there is a constitutional right to [[homosexual]] activity in ''[[Bowers v. Hardwick]]'', 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

Pierce Butler, although agreeing in result with Brandeis in Olmstead, did not agree with Brandeis's sweeping claim. Butler also rejected many other mistakes of the Court of his time. Butler was the only dissenter, for example, from Justice Holmes' repugnant upholding of forced sterilization in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927). When Justice Holmes declared that "three generations of imbeciles are enough," Butler was the only Justice who objected.

Pierce Butler, although agreeing in result with Brandeis in Olmstead, did not agree with Brandeis's sweeping claim. Butler also rejected many other mistakes of the Court of his time. Butler was the only dissenter, for example, from Justice Holmes' repugnant upholding of forced sterilization in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927). When Justice Holmes declared that "three generations of imbeciles are enough," Butler was the only Justice who objected.