If a natural disaster strikes my area and the power is out for weeks, one of the limitations would be that the people would not feel that safe. Security wouldn't be enforced and since there is no security, there could be several possibilities of theft. Another limitation would be searches for any and everything. Both of these limitations should be practiced, so even if there is a national disaster we could be ready. The 4th amendment can be used as an explanation of how the limits
With twenty-seven amendments in existence, each broadens protections that were not previously covered. Within these twenty-seven are several major ones that strongly influence the dynamic in which Americans vote. The fourteenth and nineteenth coexist in a manner that allows them both to strongly control who votes, and how. Ratified on July 9, 1868, the fourteenth amendment expanded citizenship to all born on U.S. soil and sought to expand national rights to all, regardless of race (Fourteenth). This amendment included the expansion of citizenship to anyone truly born in the U.S., regardless of who their ancestors were-granting citizenship to former slaves.
In the United States Constitution, our 14th amendment states that “[no state shall] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the laws” (Dictionary.com). The case Lawrence vs Texas, which started in 1998, in Harris County, was a case that was deeply investigating homosexual’s 14th amendment. It all began when four law enforcement officers were responding to a false call about a person armed with a firearm. After arriving at the house and going in they encountered John Lawrence and Tyron Garner engaging in "deviate sexual intercourse, namely anal sex, with a member of the same sex" (supreme.justia.com). According to the Texas sexual offenses a “deviate sexual [act]” is stated in the “Texas Penal Code Title 5.
III. THE COURT SHOULD PROVIDE VICTIMS OF MALICIOUS PROSECUTION A FOURTH AMENDMENT REMEDY AS A MATTER OF GOOD PUBLIC POLICY The Fourth Amendment is well-suited to ground Section 1983 claims by individuals seeking remedies for extended pre-trial detention due to police misconduct and improper probable cause. As the plurality opinion in Albright noted, “[t]he Framers considered the matter of pretrial deprivations of liberty and drafted the Fourth Amendment to address it….We
Apple is trying to protect the American people that own any apple product from the FBI. The FBI wants apple to unlock the phone from the San Bernardino 's but Apple is not doing it because it is against the 4th amendment. Since the FBI can’t get into it because Apple can not give permission to the FBI, also they don’t have any reason to look at the phone so Apple did not allow tat to happen. My opinion on this matter is that apple is doing the right thing, if the government was able to get a hold of all the information that a single person had on their phone, I am pretty sure people would be embarrassed because of all the personal information on their phones. If Apple gave them the right to look through their phone than the 4th amendment would be compromised and then that can start an up riot.
The 4th Amendment may be aggravating for the police, but on the other hand is beneficial for United States citizens. The 4th Amendment preserves protection, produces citizens to feel secure, and prohibits insignificant searches. Without the involvement of the 4th Amendment in the United States, government or authorities could invade privacy and go through citizen’s belongings without any type of
There are many rights that American students are free to enjoy. One of them being the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. This right is commonly questioned by many. There are many instances that people have brought into courts as prestigious as the Supreme Court.
The First Amendment guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. There are many ideas expressed in times where it would be inappropriate or unnecessary to use one’s freedom of speech. These circumstances would be where something is inappropriate or misidentified as hate speech. There are many situations where someone may want to say something, yet there are times where some things should not be said.
The whole point of the Fourth Amendment is not to completely stop the police, because the amendment can be waived if an officer has a warrant, or a person’s consent. The Fourth Amendment states that generally a search or seizure is illegal unless there is a warrant, or special circumstances. Technically stating that a citizen is protected by the Fourth Amendment, until a government employee gets a warrant, and then they can invade a citizen’s privacy. Also people state that the FISA Court’s warrants are constitutional, but the NSA’s surveillance is unconstitutional. Even though people do not like the NSA’s surveillance, the NSA is legal because the FISA Court that the people did not mind makes it legal.
The Fourth Amendment contains some points that could be used for malicious purposes and technically still be Constitutional. For example, law enforcement officer can use a subpoena instead of a warrant, according to Your Digital Trail: Does the Fourth Amendment Protect Us? (2) Subpoenas are easier to get since they do not require a judge to determine if there is probable cause, yet there are more ways a law enforcement officer could cheat to get someone to remove his/her rights. According to Wex Legal Dictionary | The Fourth Amendment, if the person convicted confesses or agrees to nullify the effects of the Fourth Amendment, it cannot protect them.
To start off with the most important thing about the 4th amendment is that we the people should for safe to go in public and not be afraid to be searched unless the police have probable cause, and reasonable suspicion. The first question i'll be addressing is what fundamental should a American have in the 4th Amendment. Katz v Ohio is a perfect example of what fundamental should a American have in the 4th Amendment, Katz was convicted under an 8-count indictment. I believe the government went too far by attaching a device to hear his conversations, that's invading personal privacy with a non probable cause. The next reason i'll be presenting is writs of assistance.
The biggest benefit of the 4th amendment is that it deters searches. The law enforcement will not be able to search you without transgressing the law. Thus your car will not be probed if you were to be pulled over by the police, without your sanction. Furthermore your personal items: backpack, house, or phone are not sanctioned to be confiscated without a warrant or your sanction. Consequently denizens feel very confident because there privacy is forfended.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated… We all know the fourth amendment. It's the amendment that guarantees our safety within our homes and our personal belongings. Yet, how much do you know about the fourth amendment? The fourth amendment is full of history, controversy, and discussion, even in modern day.
Some may argue that the Fourth Amendment makes gathering evidence more difficult for the law enforcement. The Fourth Amendment’s ultimate goal is the “provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from arbitrary governmental intrusions” (Legal Information). Therefore the Fourth Amendment gives everyone a right to their own privacy. Even though that it might seem like it would make it harder to gather information. The Fourth Amendment is "the right of the people to be secure in their persons.”
Since the amendments were established, they were used to help citizens with their individual rights. The fourth amendment is one of the most violated amendments throughout history of public officials. The Fourth Amendment clearly sates, that people have the right to be secure in their person, houses, paper, and against unreasonable search and seizures. Even if a person is guilty, if their fourth amendment is violated, the evidence that is obtained will not be used in court. After such incidences involving the fourth amendment, the plain view doctrine was put in place so that an officer is able to seize without a warrant and obtain evidence from a suspect.
