More handpicked essays just for you.
4 th amendment importance
Essays on why the 4th amendment is important
Essays on why the 4th amendment is important
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Fourth Amendment is important for many reasons. In this essay I will outline the historical origins of the Fourth Amendment and assess why its inclusion was so important to those considering ratifying the Constitution. I will also select a case in which a search warrant was used during an investigation. By outlining the case I will state my opinion about whether or not a warrant was necessary and how the search warrant contributed or did not contribute to the result in the case. In modern society it is easy to forget where many of our freedoms from government intrusion into one’s home was a natural right and fundamental to our liberty. The Fourth Amendment states: …show more content…
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable search 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 person’s or things to be seized.” In the eighteenth century England as well as in the American colonies, blanket warrants were used to ransack the homes of people suspected of political dissidence and smuggling.
The Fourth Amendment was written directly in response to British general warrants, called Writs of Assistance. When the Constitution was being drafted there were two sides in the Great Debate. The Federalists wanted to ratify the Constitution and the Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the Constitution. The Federalists didn’t think that the addition of the Bill of Rights were not necessary. On the other hand the Anti-Federalists felt that the government had too much power. They wanted the states to have more power over themselves. The Bill of Rights were added to gain support from the Anti-Federalists. When the Fourth Amendment became part of the Constitution, it was originally only applied to the federal government. Later, it was applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourth Amendment. In 1914 the Supreme Court established what has been known as the Exclusionary Rule, in the landmark case of Weeks v. U.S (Mannheimer, M.Z. 2015). The exclusionary rule established consequences for violating a suspects fourth amendment
rights. I choose U.S v. Pulliam that took place in Colorado. Keith Scott Pulliam was a suspect on a case where investigators suspected Pulliam of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The police executed a search warrant in Pulliam home. The search warrant didn’t have the attachment page explaining everything that would be searched. In court Pulliam defense tried to suppress the search warrant because the police failed to give him a copy of the attachment page. The court found that the attachments are part of the court record and can be reviewed anytime by Pulliam. The motion to suppress evidence obtained by the search warrant were denied. In this case I believe that the search warrant was needed in this case. The investigators needed the warrant to protect any evidence collected at the scene for the prosecution’s case. Search warrant are important so the suspect’s fourth amendment isn’t violated. Although the attachment wasn’t with the search warrant, the warrant is still valid because it’s a court ordered from a judge that approved specific evidence that needed to be collected. (www.caselaw4cops.net) In conclusion, the fourth amendment is mainly about unreasonable search and seizures by the State or Federal authorities. Since the founders drafted the Constitution there were many changes and added documents, to ensure that the government didn’t have too much power. The fourth amendment is a prime example of federal laws which protect the people from authorizes so they can’t violate our rights. The amendment is not only for the protection of the people, but it’s also there to ensure that the police follow the law so the court can prosecute the criminals. From my case example the use of a warrant is vital in prosecuting a suspect. Making sure that a search warrant is executed properly, will ensure that the suspect’s fourth amendment right are not violated. If a warrant isn’t obtained the court may find evidence collected at a crime scene inadmissible and suppressed by the judge, making it very difficult to convict a suspect. So the importance of obtaining a search warrant is vital to any criminal investigation. Law enforcement needs to make sure that when investigating a crime they make sure no suspect’s rights are violated.
The 4th amendment provides citizens protections from unreasonable searches and seizures from law enforcement. Search and seizure cases are governed by the 4th amendment and case law. The United States Supreme Court has crafted exceptions to the 4th amendment where law enforcement would ordinarily need to get a warrant to conduct a search. One of the exceptions to the warrant requirement falls under vehicle stops. Law enforcement can search a vehicle incident to an individual’s arrest if the individual unsecured by the police and is in reaching distance of the passenger compartment. Disjunctive to the first exception a warrantless search can be conducted if there is reasonable belief
The 4th amendment protects people from being searched or having their belongings taken away without any good reason. The 4th amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791. For many years prior to the ratifiation, people were smuggling goods because of the Stamp Act; in response Great Britain passed the writs of assistance so British guards could search someone’s house when they don’t have a good reason to. This amendment gave people the right to privacy. “Our answer to the question of what policy must do before searching a cellphone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple - get a warrant.” This was addressed to officers searching people’s houses and taking things without having a proper reason. I find
The 4th amendment protects US citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. If it is violated by the government, all evidence found in the unlawful search and seizure must be excluded as per the exclusionary rule which serves as a remedy for 4th amendment violations. Before a remedy can be given for violation of the 4th amendment, a court must determine whether the 4th amendment is applicable to a particular case. The 4th Amendment only applies when certain criteria are met. The first criterion is that the government must be involved in a search or seizure via government action.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states that people have the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,” but the issue at hand here is whether this also applies to the searches of open fields and of objects in plain view and whether the fourth amendment provides protection over these as well. In order to reaffirm the courts’ decision on this matter I will be relating their decisions in the cases of Oliver v. United States (1984), and California v. Greenwood (1988) which deal directly with the question of whether a person can have reasonable expectations of privacy as provided for in the fourth amendment with regards to objects in an open field or in plain view.
The Constitution of the United States of America protects people’s rights because it limits the power of government against its people. Those rights guaranteed in the Constitution are better known as the Bill of Rights. Within these rights, the Fourth Amendment protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable search and seizures […]” (Knetzger & Muraski, 2008). According to the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant must be issued before a search and seizure takes place. However, consent for lawful search is one of the most common exceptions to the search warrant requirement.
Do the First and Fourth Amendments Protect?" Current Issues & Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument with Readings. Ed. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin's, 1999. 316-324.
The Second Amendment states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This statement basically means that people should be able to own guns for their own security and that right should not be taken away. The Second Amendment was added to the Constitution because the creators of the Constitution wanted to make sure that it protected basic rights, including the right to bear arms. It was also added to the Constitution because shortly after it was ratified, James Madison wanted to give more power to the state militia and to give more power to the people to give them the ability to fight back against the Federalists and the tyrannical government they were creating. After fighting off the British, the Second Amendment was created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against controlling government and protect themselves with their own weapons.
The amendment that raises my own eye is the Search and Seizures Clause of the Fourth Amendment. Like most of the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment has its origins in 17th and 18th century, English common law. Unlike the rest of the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment's origins can be traced precisely it arose out of a strong public reaction to three cases from the 1760s, two decided in England and one in the colonies. Two cases from England, “Entick vs. Carrington” and “Wilkes vs. Wood”, involved plaintiffs who produced pamphlets criticizing the government. During the arresting, officials seized books and papers from the plaintiff’s property. A court agreed that the officers’ actions constituted trespassing. The third case occurred within the colonies and involved “writs of assistance,” which permitted officials to search for smuggled goods without specify which house or what goods.
The Fourth Amendment is the component of the Constitution, which protects a person’s individual rights pertaining to his person and property. The Fourth Amendment is directly stated as follows:
The Fourth Amendment came almost directly from experience of the colonials. But it wasn’t introduced only as a fundamental right, but also as a major part of the English ideals as well. In England, ''Everyman's house is his castle'' was an honored phrase, enforcing the idea that it is not only is it a law, but a right that cannot be delegated by any government idea. There are two major cases where this idea was tried. Semayne’s Case and Entick v. Carrington.
A-58). It also requires “a warrant that specifically describes the place to be searched, the person involved, and suspicious things to be seized” (Goldfield et al. A- 58). The Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of the people by preventing public officials from searching homes or personal belonging without reason. It also determines whether “someone 's privacy is diminished by a governmental search or seizure” (Heritage). This amendment protects citizens from having evidence which was seized illegally “used against the one whose privacy was invaded” (Heritage). This gives police incentive to abide by the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment protects a person’s privacy “only when a person has a legitimate expectation to privacy” (FindLaw). This means the police cannot search person’s home, briefcase, or purse. The Fourth Amendment also requires there to be certain requirements before a warrant can be issued. The Fourth Amendment requires a warrant “when the police search a home or an office, unless the search must happen immediately, and there is no opportunity to obtain a warrant” (Heritage). The Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of the people, but also the safety of the people. When there is probable cause, a government official can destroy property or subdue a suspect. The Fourth Amendment prevents government officials from harassing the public.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution was first introduced in 1789 by James Maddison, and was a part of the Bill of Rights which includes the first ten amendments. The Fourth Amendment was created and ultimately it was created to protect two things the right to privacy and the freedom against unlawful invasions. The exact wording of 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 person or things to be seized.”(“Fourth Amendment”). Now after reading that some people may think they are completely safe from all types of searches and seizures, but they would be wrong. The Fourth Amendment is not a total protection against all searches and seizures against all searches and seizures; if it is declared under law a person can be searched or seized. (“What does the Fourth Amendment Mean?”). There are some specific things that are governed by the Fourth Amendment that deal specifically with criminal procedure such as arrests with warrants, searches with warrants, arrests without warrants, searches without warrants, seizure of evidence, and different types of stops and seizures (Criminal Procedure). All of this might seem confusing to the average American when just reading it casually and it sometimes can be for a person such as a police officer who is supposed to be fully educated on all these things and more. Almost all United States citizens know their First Amendment rights such as free speech and jury trial, but the Fourth Amendment always seems ...
In many ways the fourth amendment has been taken advantage of, being everything can be saved on web sites "When I search the Web, I've shared it with the Web Company, when I send an email, I've shared it with the email service." Says David Cole, a lawyer who teaches constitutional law and national security at Georgetown University. All of that information has lost its constitutional barriers, and without show illegal activity they can receive this information. In recent years, the Fourth Amendment's suitability in electronic searches and seizures has received much attention from the courts. With the coming of the internet and the increased popularity of computers it made everything easier to get without any proof. There has been a developing amount of crime occurring electronically. Therefore, evidence of crimes can be found on computers, hard drives, or other electronic devices. Implied by this information it has been overreached by the government.
Throughout the years schools have begun to use the advancement of technology in their classes mostly for educational purposes. This includes the students the collection of students’ test scores, over-all grade and their attendance records. This is an invasion of privacy and it has to stop. The reasons for this are the following, it violates the students’ 4th amendment rights and hackers could easily get into where the data is being stored. Some of the schools that use technology in their classrooms have also gathered data on the students’ health, sleeping habits, sexual activity, prescription drug use and alcohol use and share the data that collected with other school districts, this effects the students’ intellectual freedom.
As technology continues to advance, digital data and personal privacy have become even more crucial to protect. Mobile phones operate similar to small computers and have become an integral part of the way people communicate and live their lives and can contain a digital record of virtually every aspect of a person’s life. The Fourth amendment was added to United States Constitution in December 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. As stated by Swidle, the Fourth Amendment specifically provides: “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” (Swidle, 2013).