Schema-Root.org logo

 

  cross-referenced news and research resources about

 United States Supreme Court decisions regarding the Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted in response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, a type of general search warrant issued by the British government and a major source of tension in pre-Revolutionary America. The Fourth Amendment was introduced in Congress in 1789 by James Madison, along with the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, in response to Anti-Federalist objections to the new Constitution. Congress submitted the amendment to the states on September 28, 1789. By December 15, 1791, the necessary three-quarters of the states had ratified it. On March 1, 1792, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson announced the adoption of the amendment.

Schema-Root.org logo
images:  google   yahoo YouTube
spacer

updated Mon. April 30, 2018

-
In Collins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court will decide whether police need a warrant to search a motor vehicle close to a person's home. The justices will try to balance powerful Fourth Amendment pressures on both sides—the traditionally strong protection of privacy interests at a person's home weighted ...
A California appeals court reversed the conviction holding that the DNA Act violated defendant's rights under the Fourth Amendment [GPO backgrounder, PDF] to the US Constitution. While an appeal of that decision was pending before the California Supreme Court, the US Supreme Court [official website], ...

The state took the reversal to the California Supreme Court, which held the case while the U.S. Supreme Court decided Maryland v. King – a Fourth Amendment challenge to Maryland's law requiring the collection of DNA from arrestees charged with “serious crimes.” In King, the high court found Maryland's ...
In a divided decision Monday, the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court said there was evidence that Andrew Kisela was entitled to qualified immunity in the ... in which any competent officer would have known that shooting Hughes to protect Chadwick would violate the Fourth Amendment,'' the justices wrote.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with an Arizona police officer in a case testing the constitutional limits for the use of force, ... The wounded woman, Amy Hughes, had accused Kisela of using excessive force in violation of the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which ...
On Monday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court made the American criminal justice system a little less just. First, the court granted immunity to a police ... Hughes survived the shooting and sued Kisela for using excessive force in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ...

While Buza's case was pending in the California courts, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013 rejected a defendant's Fourth Amendment challenge to Maryland law requiring DNA swabbing of those arrested for serious crimes. That decision, the California Supreme Court wrote Monday, “significantly altered the ...
But Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not mince words when she responded in her dissent that "Such a one-sided approach to qualified immunity transforms the doctrine into an absolute shield for law enforcement officers, gutting the deterrent effect of the Fourth Amendment." The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. ...
Microsoft Corp., that has been appealed in multiple courts including the Supreme Court, where a ruling is currently pending. A court decision is now ... The CLOUD Act is designed to allow U.S. law enforcement to obtain digital evidence for criminal investigations overseas, regardless of local laws. Countries ...
The judge who granted a defense motion to suppress evidence of the blood draw was guided by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Missouri v. McNeely, which said that dissipation of alcohol from a defendant's blood does not constitute a per se exigency justifying a warrantless blood draw.
The presence of conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, appointed by President Donald Trump, leads many to predict that the court will rule 5-4 in “Janus v. AFSCME” that organized labor can't collect any fees from workers for whom unions are obligated to negotiate. However, some ...
The Supreme Court's pre-Riley case law, however, permits warrantless and suspicionless “routine” searches of items like luggage that travelers carry across the border, a rule known as the border search exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. Based on these pre-Riley cases, the ...
“To date, the Supreme Court has refused to extend the protection of the Fourth Amendment to a foreign citizen.” U.S. District Judge Edward Prado, sitting by designation, issued a dissent in which Fifth Circuit Judge James Graves joined. The dissent said it would have allowed the teen's family to pursue ...
After the North Dakota Supreme Court's unanimous ruling Thursday that a Bismarck police officer did not violate her Fourth Amendment rights in his warrantless ... “There's conflicting cases around the United States on this particular issue (warrantless entry), and the U.S. Supreme Court has not taken up this ...
One of the major bulwarks of individual liberty in the United States of America is the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from “unreasonable ... However, in the modern era, the U.S. Supreme Court dangerously reduced Fourth-Amendment protections by creating exceptions to the exclusionary rule.
"It's quite understandable to me why a person might be a little harsh or a little impatient when they've waited their whole life for us to talk about justice," ... "He has argued in the United States Supreme Court in favor of defendants to extend Fourth Amendment rights and others that I might not be aware of, and ...
Court rules that no warrant is necessary for border searches of a U.S. citizen's cell phone content. ... This ruling will clearly not be the end of the story as it sets up a collision course with the Supreme Court's 2014 ruling that specifically extended Fourth Amendment protections to include cell phones. Indeed ...

US Supreme Court Justices John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch, amused on Jan. ... cause to arrest the revelers—as required by Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable governmental searches and seizures—because no one in the house could authorize the entry.
Again, this year, there are a number of Fourth Amendment cases before the U.S. Supreme Court that have the potential to significantly change the law and ... United States is whether the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and arrests, requires that the police obtain a warrant to ...
Again, this year, there are a number of Fourth Amendment cases before the U.S. Supreme Court that have the potential to significantly change the law and ... United States is whether the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and arrests, requires that the police obtain a warrant to ...
Dissenting from the Supreme Court's recent decision not to review California's 10-day waiting period to purchase firearms in Silvester v. ... The past three decades have seen a steady erosion of the privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment, as a majority of the court has bowed to the practical realities of ...
United States oral arguments at SCOTUS. In case you've been living under a rock, this is the fight over whether the government can use a domestic warrant under the 1986 Stored Communications Act to access data stored overseas—specifically in this scenario, emails on a Microsoft cloud server in Ireland.
When courts recognize and strengthen our Fourth Amendment rights against warrantless, suspicionless searches of our electronic devices at the border, it's an important check on the government's ... However, the year after the Ninth Circuit decided Cotterman, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Riley v.
And Microsoft said that act doesn't apply outside of the United States and objected to the warrant. The lower federal appellate court agreed with Microsoft. The Justice Department brought the appeal to the Supreme Court. So the arguments today we're going to focus on whether the act applies outside of the ...
The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday about whether emails stored overseas are subject to a U.S. warrant. It all revolved around a ... Microsoft argues that an international treaty between the United States and Ireland should prevail and is the only correct way to obtain the emails. Ireland agrees.
As the case has worked its way through appellate courts, Microsoft has taken the position that US law enforcement needs to go through Irish authorities if they want to obtain the emails. The United States has a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with Ireland, as it does with over 60 other countries and the ...
The Supreme Court is widely expected to rule in favor of Janus on a party line 5-to-4 basis and overturn a 1977 precedent, Abood v. ... if a teacher called in sick, and an administrator had to procure a warrant before searching her desk drawer for a text book, or else risk violating the Fourth Amendment.
While a lower court sided against the firearm owners, the 9th US Circuit of Appeals upheld the state law, and Tuesday's Supreme Court action means it will ... publication of racist speech, or a 10 minute delay of a traffic stop because "abortion, speech and the Fourth Amendment are three of its favored rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court comes back from its winter break this week and plunges into a second half of the term as big as the first. ... and the Help America Vote Act? Does the Fourth Amendment prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of someone's cell phone location data over the course of 127 days?
In November, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Carpenter v. United States, a case that will determine whether the Fourth Amendment allows the government to access an individual's cellphone location records without a warrant. This case began with the arrest of Timothy Carpenter, who ...
... to be developing between conservative justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito over the issue of property rights and the Fourth Amendment. The most recent evidence of this division came on January 9, when the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Byrd v. United States. This case arose in 2014, ...
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in what may become one of the defining consumer privacy cases of our generation. The central question in Carpenter v. United States asks whether the government violates the Fourth Amendment by accessing an individual's historical cell phone locations ...
A divided Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that the Fourth Amendment protects driveways from warrantless searches, Minnesota Public Radio has ... his investigation in 'open fields' and then entered Chute's curtilage with the purpose of seeking him out, as is permitted under [the U.S. Supreme Court's] ...
A divided Minnesota Supreme Court today further defined the areas of people's property where police can't search without a warrant. ... Justice Margaret Chutich said a U.S. Supreme Court-established test of what part of a homeowner's property favors Fourth Amendment protection falls in Chute's favor.
California, the U.S. Supreme Court held that law enforcement officials violated the Fourth Amendment when they searched an arrestee's cell phone without a warrant. "Modern cell phones are not just ... The 11th Circuit's ruling came in the matter of United States v. Vergara. Hernando Vergara is a U.S. ...
United States, in which the petitioner argues that under the Fourth Amendment, “[h]is general acquiescence to a search of his bag … did not extend to ... If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you'd like us to ...
United States, which is currently before the Supreme Court for potential review, opens a window into the common police practice of consensual searches ... take up Gonzalez-Badillo, it would join an assortment of cases this term on digital privacy, vehicle searches, and other Fourth Amendment issues that ...
Dahda v. United States arguably poses a clash between two of the Supreme Court's recent passions: strict adherence to statutory texts and cutting back on the exclusionary rule. This tension is unusual because the court's exclusionary-rule decisions typically involve Fourth Amendment violations.
In November, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Carpenter v. United States, a case that will determine whether the Fourth Amendment allows the government to access an individual's cellphone location records without a warrant. This case began with the arrest of Timothy Carpenter, who ...
The U.S. government's zealous prosecution has made Ulbricht something of a martyr in the Bitcoin community, and it did seem that the government was ... The brief in this case deals with IP addresses in the same context, but rather than pointing out the right way to administer the Fourth Amendment, ...
2018 started off with a double-feature in the U.S. Supreme Court starring the Fourth Amendment and police authority to search and seize. ... This case pits the automobile exception to a warrant requirement against the Fourth Amendment's protection of a home and its curtilage from warrantless searches.
United States, which asks whether a driver has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a rental car when he is not an authorized driver. ... If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you'd like us to consider for ...
... to be developing between conservative justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito over the issue of property rights and the Fourth Amendment. The most recent evidence of this division came on January 9, when the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Byrd v. United States. This case arose in 2014, ...
... to be developing between conservative justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito over the issue of property rights and the Fourth Amendment. The most recent evidence of this division came on January 9, when the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Byrd v. United States. This case arose in 2014, ...
At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman examines “the most antagonistic pairs of justices based on majority and dissent authorship” since Chief Justice ... If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you'd like us to ...
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in what may become one of the defining consumer privacy cases of our generation. The central question in Carpenter v. United States asks whether the government violates the Fourth Amendment by accessing an individual's historical cell phone locations ...
The majority noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that checking a driver's license and making ordinary inquiries are part of the officer's traffic mission and do not violate the Fourth Amendment if the officer made a lawful traffic stop. “There is no dispute that the initial seizure of Smith (the traffic stop) ...
The Court will have an opportunity to reconsider the doctrine in Carpenter v. United States, which involves a decidedly digital-age investigative tool: cellphone records. The question presented in Carpenter is whether the Fourth Amendment permits the warrantless search and seizure of cellphone records ...
When the government wants a company in the United States to turn over private data stored in another country, which country's laws apply? The Supreme Court is set to consider that question in a case that raises a novel legal question about warrants, borders, and the Fourth Amendment. The case involves ...
“Neither the purse, nor the vehicle that contained the purse, came into police custody as a result of her arrest. On these facts, the state has failed to show that this search fits under the inventory-search exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement,” the Ohio Supreme Court majority opinion said.


 

news and opinion


 


 


 


 


schema-root.org

    usa
     government
      branches
       judicial branch
        supreme court
         decisions
           fourth amendment
             olmstead v. united states
             smith v. maryland
             united states v. jones

US Supreme Court decisions:
           association
           corporations
           criminal
           due process
           elections
           family
           fourth amendment
           privacy
           property
           religion
           rico
           schools
           separation of powers
           speech