Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of the fourth amendment
Fourth amendment legal analysis
Privacy under the fourth amendment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Peter Crumans 4th amendments were not violated when he was compelled to show his Facebook page. School officials were trying to protect the wellbeing of their students, therefore trying to get to the bottom of what this tip was about and needed to search the suspected student who after a little persistence began to cooperate. Principal Lyons received an anonymous tip that Peter Curman had posted that he would be conducting a few sales of illegal drugs on school property giving him reasonable suspicion to search the student. In the case of New Jersey vs. T.L.O school officials were able to search a student due to reasonable suspicion for violations on school property, therefore giving principal Lyons justification because he not only received
These actions did not go by what was established by an earlier, similar case, and by performing the scan with no warrant, the government did not allow DLK to conduct private activities in his own home. Although some argue that the government’s actions were acceptable because they only scanned what was visible to the public, they still used a device not readily available to the public to see inside DLK’s home. The government’s actions were unacceptable, and a warrant should have been obtained prior to performing the search in order to make it
On July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth amendment was formally introduced to the Constitution and granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.” These words have as an ideal purpose that all levels of the federal government must operate within the law and provide fair conditions for all people. As a result, the states had a obligation to the public. Through the Fourteenth amendment, states were forbidden from denying any person “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” or to “deny any person within jurisdiction the equal protection of laws.” By directly mentioning the role of the states, the Fourteenth amendment also expanded civil rights to African American slaves who had been emancipated after the American Civil War.
It has been argued that birthright citizenship, or the legal right to citizenship for all children born in a country 's territory, regardless of parentage, may reward/encourage illegal immigrant parents an excuse to stay in the country. Despite this possibility, the 14th Amendment should not be modified. The 14th Amendment states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” (U.S. Const. amend.
Our founding fathers created the Bill Of Rights which are the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States. One of the most important amendments is the Fourth Amendment. It 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”(p. 11). What are our founding fathers were trying to do is keep our country from a police state, a state in which law enforcement could enter our homes without probable cause. This protection provides the citizens of the
Many American citizens are willing to give up a certain degree of their rights, including their own privacy, to try and keep our country safe from terrorism. No matter the reason, however, it is never justifiable to interfere on our Constitutional rights. Former President Bush eavesdropping on innocent citizens, the USA PATRIOT Act, the Freedom Act, and Japanese internment camps are all primary examples of our constitutional rights as Americans being overlooked. “The United States trampling on the Constitutional rights of its citizens to protect the nation is never justifiable.” After the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1942, the United States were on their toes.
"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". The 4th amendment was made based on the Founding Fathers experience with the Kings agents and the all purpose rit of assistances that they used abusively. Without the 4th amendment, we would be at the will of the police because they could come into our household, search anything and take whatever they want. "A reasonable expatiation of privacy" the 4th amendment secures the protection of the people
Some people may think that the 14th amendment does a poor job of protecting people’s rights. In document five it explains how on September 11, 2001,with the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, it has caused video surveillance in the United States to increase. For example the U.S has programs that use facial recognition that help match photographs of criminals faces to the criminal. Another program that we use helps prevent suicide bombers from attacking. Some people may think that prevention of terrible events reoccuring or occurring is a good thing, but using security systems everywhere may be a violation of their rights and privacy.
In the case, the Court did not see sufficient evidence to support the claim that the police violated the respondent’s Fourth Amendment right, prior to entering the resident. There is no evidence of threats or demands made by the police officers, that would insinuate the officer did anything wrong. Because the police in this case did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment prior to the exigency, the Court held that the exigency did in fact justify the warrantless search. The officers re-acted upon suspicion and training (Vile, n.d.).
Following the national outrage of September 11, the Bush administration passed the Patriot Act in 2001. This allowed the government to surveillance suspected terrorists without a warrant. These government powers were extended in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in 2006. These laws were passed through congress. Arguments by some that this warrantless surveillance violates the Fourth Amendment ignores the legal concept of ‘substantive due process.’
The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments included in the constitution. It was designed to protect our rights as US citizens. An ongoing debate on whether or not it truly compromises on our rights in the name of security has been occurring for a while. The fourth amendment states that the police or any other government agents are prohibited from searching our property without an apparent cause that we have committed a crime. If the fourth amendment clearly states that the government are prohibited from searching our property, why do we have the National Security Agency?
In the name of national security, the government has implemented measures that infringe upon individual freedoms and rights. The USA PATRIOT Act, for instance, granted authorities broad powers to conduct surveillance and wiretapping without sufficient oversight, undermining Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Moreover, the expansion of the No-Fly List and watchlists has led to numerous cases of mistaken identity, resulting in innocent individuals being subjected to unwarranted scrutiny and discrimination. Additionally, the indefinite detention of suspected terrorists without trial at Guantanamo Bay and other undisclosed facilities has raised serious concerns about due process and the right to a fair trial.
To begin, we need to understand the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment was created to prevent the government from breaching into our homes and convicting us of crimes based on evidence they discover within our homes. It was vital to state unreasonable searches in the constitution, and an unreasonable search is a search done without
As for personal and public safety, the Fourth Amendment is intended for people to have the right to be secured within their personal owning. People shall have the right to object from unreasonable search and seizures without a warrant, probable cause, and without the support from oath or affirmation. I think the Fourth Amendment is important because it definitely protects your right to give up anything that is your property and what you pay for. What’s yours is yours and people, as well as law enforcers, should respect those rights because they also have that right to not give up anything. I believe that the significance of the Fourth Amendment is that people have the right to not have their belongings taken away from them without any “good
The fourth amendment clearly 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” (“NSA Spying on Americans is Illegal” np). This means that people’s houses or personal belongings cannot be searched without a court order or probable cause, deeming spying by the government unconstitutional. Adding to this, there are three laws that explicitly state that it is illegal to spy on people, one of them being under title 50 saying “A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute” (“NSA Spying on Americans is