The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is that part of the Bill of Rights which protects each and every one of us against unreasonable searches and seizures. It reads, "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 Warrants 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."
Yet, the US Supreme Court took a significant step to weaken this essential civil liberty. According to the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy, "The case focuses on the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. An Alabama man is petitioning to have his conviction on drug and firearms charges overturned because evidence leading to his arrest was found during a search based on an incorrect warrant for arrest. However, a decision by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his conviction, and in doing so created an exception to the long-standing exclusionary rule, which states that evidence obtained from an unlawful police search is not admissible by the prosecution during a criminal trial." In a 5-4 ruling split along ideological lines the Court ruled that evidence gathered from an unlawful arrest based on inadvertent police error may be used against criminal defendants. In their ruling, the Justices muddied the waters concerning how one determines unreasonable searches and seizures and gives police unnecessary leeway to be lax and sloppy in their investigation. Prior to this bad ruling, police had to be attentive to detail and take care in how they proceeded in doing a search. Now, the leeway provided by the court only weakens the defendants' constitutional rights.
Leave a comment