Fourth Amendment
| Part of the series on the |
| Standards of review |
| Other legal theories |
| Defining moments in law |
| Modalities of Constitutional Law |
| Issues in Constitutional Law |
On the surface the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution seems pretty clear, but when it comes down to it, it can be quite complicated. The text is pretty short:
“”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.
|
Basically if the police are investigating a person they have to obtain a document from a judge that allows them to burst into that person's private property and search through it for evidence (this generally includes wiretaps). Likewise if the police want to arrest you they have to get permission first. In order to obtain this document the investigators have to convince a judge that there is "probable cause" that a crime has been committed or that evidence of said crime exists. If somebody is arrested and put on trial on the basis of evidence illegally obtained such evidence must be excluded from the trial.[1]
[edit] Ifs ands or buts
Police and criminal procedure is rarely as cut and dry as the Bill of Rights would seem to suggest; there are many exceptions to the need for warrants. These include:
- If the officer actually sees you committing a crime he or she may arrest you.
- If you left evidence somewhere outside of your property (including the trash).[2][3]
- If you invited the officers in and let them look around.[4]
- Possible life or death situations.
- If you are in the custody of the U.S. Prison Service, the fact that you are in custody is reasonable enough for any search and seizure applied against you.
- If you are a government employee in certain fields, you may be subject to "suspicion-less" random drug testing.[5]
- If you are a public school student involved in competitive extracurricular activities, you may be subject to "suspicion-less" random drug testing.
The case law on what does, and doesn't, qualify as "probable cause" could fill several volumes.
[edit] Conspiracy Theorist
George W. Bush, being the asshole we all know and love, tried to get around this amendment in order to spy on Americans. This caused Aaron Russo and Alex Jones[6] to throw a fit of course.
The NSA, cited in the same video [7], tried to also get around this by changing "Propable cause" to "reasonable belief".
Basically they have it in their head that the autrocities of the current US president is proof of the NWO, even though they're usually chucked out in four years. As for the NSA, turns out they didn't need this to be changed.
[edit] Footnotes
- ↑ Mapp v. Ohio, Wikipedia
- ↑ Hester v. United States, Wikipedia
- ↑ California v. Greenwood, Wikipedia
- ↑ Arizona v. Hicks, Wikipedia
- ↑ What Does a Scanner See?
- ↑ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mgoe0EosLkg&index=19&list=PL1D56DA4335003CCA
- ↑ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mgoe0EosLkg&index=19&list=PL1D56DA4335003CCA