The Pros And Cons Of The 4th Amendment

The fourth amendment applies only to full searches and arrests; so short of full arrest and searches, officers’ discretion controls their contacts with individuals in public places.

The Constitution of The United States of America was created “in Order to form a more perfect Union.” Our rights, as citizens, are protected by the first ten amendments also known as the Bill of Rights. These amendments were established due to the strong objections of the British rule on the original colonies. Particularly speaking, the fourth amendment has protected our rights from unlawful search and seizures. With the implementation of “Probable Cause” and the vagueness of the Bill of Rights, the rules have been stretched and some say violated.We the people, need to develop the fine line between Probable cause and an unlawful search.

Is the 4th amendment still valuable in modern society since the 4th amendment can no longer be directly applied with the rise of new technology? The fourth Amendment is, “ 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”(Fourth Amendment). This amendment originally was created to protect houses from being raided uncontrollably in the mid 17th century. Obviously in the 17th century technology such as the internet did not exist yet, so important documents and information were on paper. Therefore all the significant documents were stored in a house, or building making it easy to secure them. Similarly because of the 4th Amendment their house couldn’t be searched without a warrant so all of their important documents would be safe. Fast forward 300 years many things have changed and society is still using an outdated document to judge modern society which calls for an evolved amendment. For example, the 4th Amendment is no longer directly viable since the internet and phones weren’t created during the time period the Bill of Rights was made. Ultimately the 4th Amendment is extremely valuable because it provides us the protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, which can be inferred

The Fourth Amendment was added on December 15, 1791, and ensured that it would protect citizens from arbitrary invasions, unlawful detainments, and a citizen’s right to privacy in the United States. Throughout modern America, the Fourth would should up in various landmark court cases around the country and establish itself as one of the most fundamental rights a person can possess. Citizens have the right to feel safe in their homes, as well as being safe around their own town, but what would happen if you were not at your residence and police wanted to search your home? This can be seen in the court case Weeks v. United States.

The past several years have seen a proliferation of legislation directed at controlling criminal activities through the increased application of new laws. The effectiveness of these new laws, remains in question due not only to their relative infancy but also due to a uniform determinism of what constitutes effectiveness. The purpose of this paper will be to review the Fourth amendment particularly relating to NSA, FISA, Title III and the PATRIOT Act.

Over the past decades The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution has been very controversial. One of the most debated issues in the courts and among civilians, with regards to the Fourth Amendment, is finding a precise and clear description of what is permissible by law, and also provides individuals their rights, and assures that law enforcement uses proper discretion. The median personnel in all cases involve law enforcement agencies. Generally speaking, if there is a court cases dealing with the Fourth Amendment, there was an initial incident that included law enforcement, such as a police or sheriff.

The upshot was reversal of summary judgment as to Wilson, while affirming the judgments in favor of Schwallier, the school nurse, and Romero, the administrative assistant, since they had not acted as independent decision makers. It is noted and recognized that the school setting requires some modification of the level of suspicion of illicit activity needed to justify a search, and held that for searches by school officials. The standard of reasonable suspicion has been declared on the school and the legality of a school administrator's search of a student. Cases that are on probable cause have an implicit bearing on the reliable knowledge element of reasonable suspicion, as we have attempted to flesh out the knowledge component by looking to the degree to which known facts imply prohibited conduct, the specificity of the information received. The lesser standard for school searches could as readily be described as a moderate chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing. In this case, the school's policies strictly prohibit the nonmedical use, possession, or sale of any drug on school grounds, including any prescription or over-the-counter drug, except those for which permission to use in school has been granted pursuant to board policy. The majority finds that subjective and reasonable societal expectations of personal privacy support this type of search, which it labels a strip search, as categorically distinct, requiring distinct elements of justification on the part of school authorities for going beyond a search of outer clothing and belongings., in the majority's view, although the school officials had reasonable suspicion to believe that Redding had the pills on her person, they needed some greater level of particularized suspicion to

The Fourth Amendment is an important part of our constitution and protecting U.S. citizens’ rights, but has recently been weakened and worm holed by the government. The amendment states that there has to be a search warrant issued in order to be able to gain access to a U.S. citizens personal records. Since the 60’s however, this rule has been bypassed to allow the NSA to have the ability to search homes and personal records without a search warrant. Modern technology has negatively effected the amendment, and has been one of the most recent cases of the amendment being worm holed. When the “private information” is put on social media site, the information then belongs to the site, not the user. This allows the government to get on the site,

The Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791. This Amendment protects people from the police searching their homes and private property without a properly executed search warrant. "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" ("Annenberg Classroom," 2006).

The fourth amendment protects against “arbitrary arrests, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other

When there is a bad person under suspicion I want the police to throw the rules out the window. When it is an innocent I think the police can get to excited, and abuse this power, and understandably so. Seeing the past it is easy to figure out, but in the situation how is one to know? "It appears that the greater number of searches, as well as the vast number of arrests, take place without warrants" (CRS annotated constitution, n.d. para. 1). How can the law use this idea the wrong way. Is there not supposed to be a proceedure? Then again I want the bad people off the street and secreting getting to them might be the only way sometimes.

American understanding of 4th amendment back then is that they can use the 4th amendment as a remedy from physical interference from the government, the 4th amendment prevent the authority from breaking and entering public property without a warrant. Judge Brandeis wrote an article titled “ The Right To Privacy “ that explain us about just how outdated some of our policies and laws are. Brandeis concerned that the privacy and property protection law will become old and outdated, as time goes by. The old regulation and law about the people privacy and property will become outdated. The government can then take advantage of this. There are many rights and property that can be affected from this, things such as trademarks, trade secrets, good

I believe that when there is suspicion of me doing anything illegal then the 4th amendment is not invading my right to privacy. With the audio story i believe the officer is not doing anything extremely wrong he had suspicion and he checked Tyler McNeely for alcohol in his body and he found, I don't think he needs warrant because what is their to lose if you didn't do anything wrong then there is no problem but if you did then face the consequences.

This article talks about online privacy. When former president, Obama was in office he helped put in place internet privacy protection. President Trump signed a congressional resolution Monday overturning internet privacy protection. This allows broadband providers to get more information from consumers without having to get permission from Congress. The article states that this is a repeal but is not a replacement.

We are constantly getting violated, every second, every minute, every hour of every day and night. Currently the fourth amendment is supposed to protect us against a number of things as the law states. “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” (U.S. Const. am. 4.). In today’s world our fourth amendment rights are being violated at the most extreme levels ever seen in history. These violations are coming through NSA programs, TSA pat downs and TSA scans.