Javascript must be enabled to continue!
The Evolution of the Fourth Amendment
View through CrossRef
This book examines the history of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, and its interpretation by the Supreme Court. It concentrates on the changes in interpretation that have taken place after the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1961, decided in Mapp v. Ohio to apply the exclusionary rule, which makes illegally seized evidence inadmissible in court, to the actions of state governments. In The Evolution of the Fourth Amendment, Thomas N. McInnis demonstrates that prior to Mapp the Court relied on the warrant rule, which with limited exceptions emphasized the need to have a search warrant prior to a search or seizure. Due to the unhappiness that post-Warren Courts had with the application of the exclusionary rule, they reinterpreted the Fourth Amendment using the expansive language that the Warren Court had used in Fourth Amendment cases. In doing so, they broadened the government's powers to search and seize under the Fourth Amendment by developing new exceptions to the warrant rule, developing both the reasonableness approach and special needs test to the Fourth Amendment, limiting the expectations of privacy that citizens have, and narrowing those areas actually protected by the amendment. McInnis also examines how the Court has limited the effect of the exclusionary rule by reinterpreting when it needs to be applied and by creating new exceptions. The book ends by examining the emerging Fourth Amendment jurisprudence of the Roberts Court and assessing the future of the Fourth Amendment in a post-9/11 world.
Title: The Evolution of the Fourth Amendment
Description:
This book examines the history of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, and its interpretation by the Supreme Court.
It concentrates on the changes in interpretation that have taken place after the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1961, decided in Mapp v.
Ohio to apply the exclusionary rule, which makes illegally seized evidence inadmissible in court, to the actions of state governments.
In The Evolution of the Fourth Amendment, Thomas N.
McInnis demonstrates that prior to Mapp the Court relied on the warrant rule, which with limited exceptions emphasized the need to have a search warrant prior to a search or seizure.
Due to the unhappiness that post-Warren Courts had with the application of the exclusionary rule, they reinterpreted the Fourth Amendment using the expansive language that the Warren Court had used in Fourth Amendment cases.
In doing so, they broadened the government's powers to search and seize under the Fourth Amendment by developing new exceptions to the warrant rule, developing both the reasonableness approach and special needs test to the Fourth Amendment, limiting the expectations of privacy that citizens have, and narrowing those areas actually protected by the amendment.
McInnis also examines how the Court has limited the effect of the exclusionary rule by reinterpreting when it needs to be applied and by creating new exceptions.
The book ends by examining the emerging Fourth Amendment jurisprudence of the Roberts Court and assessing the future of the Fourth Amendment in a post-9/11 world.
Related Results
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Photo ID 123697425 © Alexandersikov | Dreamstime.com
Abstract
Originalism is an increasingly prevalent method for interpreting provisions of the US Constitution. It requires strict...
Grutter's First Amendment
Grutter's First Amendment
Most of the reaction to the Supreme Court's decision affirming the law school affirmative action policy at issue in Grutter v. Bollinger has focused on its Fourteenth Amendment imp...
The Fourth Amendment and General Law
The Fourth Amendment and General Law
For decades, Fourth Amendment protections have turned on “reasonable expectations of privacy.” But a new era may be dawning. There is growing interest among judges and scholars in ...
Not Frozen In Amber: The Second Amendment And The Constitutional Right To Innovation
Not Frozen In Amber: The Second Amendment And The Constitutional Right To Innovation
This Article advances a novel claim: the Second Amendment is the only constitutional provision that explicitly protects access to a category of technological artifacts: "arms.'' Un...
The Unabridged Fifteenth Amendment
The Unabridged Fifteenth Amendment
In the legal histories of Reconstruction, the Fifteenth Amendment is usually an afterthought compared to the Fourteenth Amendment. This oversight is perplexing: the Fifteenth Amend...
Framing the Fourth
Framing the Fourth
Our knowledge of the Fourth Amendment's history was fundamentally transformed when William Cuddihy completed his Ph.D. dissertation in 1990. Cuddihy's study was the most comprehens...
Public Law in the State Courts in 1925–1926
Public Law in the State Courts in 1925–1926
Validity of Procedure. In the summer of 1925 the appellate division of the supreme court of New York held that the City Home Rule Amendment of 1923 had not been legally adopted and...
Unamendments
Unamendments
The Constitution of the United States provides, in Article V, for its own amendment, but not every proposal for change is properly an "Amendment to this Constitution" within the me...

