The Constitution has been in the spotlight for years now, and debates surrounding certain amendments continue to rage.
And ever since Joe Biden took office, some Republicans and Conservatives have been concerned about protecting the Constitution.
Thankfully, they just got a big win from the Supreme Court.
While the First and Second Amendments get the most attention, there are other important rights we can’t forget about.
One is the Fourth Amendment, which was the focus of the latest high court decision.
And in this case, the Supreme Court sided unanimously with the Constitution, and upheld a significant citizen right.
From The Blaze:
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT UNANIMOUSLY RULED MONDAY THAT A SO-CALLED EXCEPTION TO THE FOURTH AMENDMENT CALLED ‘COMMUNITY CARETAKING’ DOES NOT PERMIT POLICE OFFICERS TO ENTER AND SEARCH YOUR HOME WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A SEARCH WARRANT, EVEN IF DOING SO MAY BE IN THE PUBLIC’S INTEREST.
IN SHORT, THIS MEANS LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN’T VIOLATE YOUR HOME WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE NECESSARY PERMISSION, AND THAT’S A BIG DEAL.
THE CASE WAS CANIGLIA V. STROM AND IT INVOLVED A RHODE ISLAND MAN WHO CLAIMED HIS HOUSE WAS SEARCHED BY OFFICERS WITHOUT A WARRANT.
WHEN THEY WERE THERE, THE COPS SEIZED TWO FIREARMS, AND APPARENTLY WITHOUT A SEARCH WARRANT.
Caniglia then sued law enforcement, arguing that the police had violated his Fourth Amendment right against search and seizure.
That’s when police argued the search had been conducted lawfully under the “community caretaking” exception.
That came from a 1973 Supreme Court case (Cady v. Dombrowski) that allowed officers to search citizens in a “reasonable manner.”
But this time, the high court said “community caretaking” doesn’t apply to private residences.
It’s a pretty huge victory for those who believe the Constitution should not be infringed upon, that’s for sure.
Key Takeaways:
- The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 to uphold a citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights.
- It says that law enforcement can’t conduct search and seizure operations without a warrant.
- The Court decided that the “community caretaking” option doesn’t apply to private residences.
