1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Y_Kistochka [10]
3 years ago
5

How does the Fourth Amendment protect individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the police? When are there exceptio

ns to this rule?
*must be a minimum of 200 words as a response*
Law
1 answer:
sammy [17]3 years ago
8 0

INTERESTS PROTECTED

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "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 ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions by the government. However, the Fourth Amendment does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures, but only those done by the government and deemed unreasonable under the law. To claim violation of Fourth Amendment as the basis for suppressing a relevant evidence, the court had long required that the claimant must prove that he himself was the victim of an invasion of privacy to have a valid standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court has departed from such requirement, issue of exclusion is to be determined solely upon a resolution of the substantive question whether the claimant's Fourth Amendment rights have been violated, which in turn requires that the claimant demonstrates a justifiable expectation of privacy, which was arbitrarily violated by the government. In general, most warrantless searches of private premises are prohibited under the Fourth Amendment, unless specific exception applies. For instance, a warrantless search may be lawful, if an officer has asked and is given consent to search; if the search is incident to a lawful arrest; if there is probable cause to search and there is exigent circumstance calling for the warrantless search. Exigent circumstances exist in situations where a situation where people are in imminent danger, where evidence faces imminent destruction, or prior to a suspect's imminent escape. On the other hand, warrantless search and seizure of properties are not illegal, if the objects being searched are in plain view. Further, warrantless seizure of abandoned property, or of properties on an open field do not violate Fourth Amendment, because it is considered that having expectation of privacy right to an abandoned property or to properties on an open field is not reasonable. However, in some states, there are some exception to this limitation, where some state authorities have granted protection to open fields. States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures protection than what is required by the Fourth Amendment, but states cannot allow conducts that violate the Fourth Amendment. Where there was a violation of one’s fourth amendment rights by federal officials, A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages, resulting from an unlawful search and seizure. Under the Bivens action, the claimant needs to prove that there has been a constitutional violation of the fourth amendment rights by federal officials acting under the color of law. However, the protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consents to or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.

You might be interested in
What type of evidence do you think might be found at each of the following crime scenes? List at least one example for each.
Andrews [41]

Answer:

In the shooting scene, you'd be able to collect the shell of the bullet and that would be one step to find out what type of gun the perpetrator used. You could go through nearby stores and look through their CCTV camera and find out what kind of car it was and maybe even catch a glimpse of the perpetrators face. However if the shooting was in a residential area you could go door to door looking for witnesses. To see if anybody heard or saw anything.

5 0
3 years ago
Customer service is important for every profession. If you were working in an organization, how would you maintain good relation
BabaBlast [244]
Ask for suggestions, be kind, be sympathetic to better understand the issue
5 0
2 years ago
What court case gave the supreme court the power of judicial review
Katarina [22]

Marbury v. Madison was the case which gave the Supreme Court the power of judicial review.

Explanation:

Marbury v. Madison was the case in which the Supreme Court, where the Court asserted its authority for judicial review, calling a law unconstitutional.

In the end of the Judge’s opinion in this judgment, Chief Justice John Marshall explained that this is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to reverse the unconstitutional law because it is necessary result of a Judge’s pledge to maintain the writings of the Constitution as directed in Article 6 in our Constitution.

The Judicial review can be defined as the power of Supreme Court to check and decide in case of a violation of existing law.  

6 0
3 years ago
How has the government tried to make paying for campaigns more fair?​
Yuri [45]

Answer:

Explanation:

If you're referring to regulations:

There is a maximum amount of money individuals and organizations can send directly to candidates (HARD MONEY)

A way to bypass this is if you send money to a political party which then runs ads for campaigns

Example; You already contributed your maximum $5,000 to the Trump Campaign but you want to contribute $20,000 in total so you give the Republican Party $15,000.

Also no foreign money is allowed in political elections.

5 0
3 years ago
Which best describes how the information lobbyists provide to lawmakers is significant? Lobbyists are allowed to provide false i
OleMash [197]

The best option that supports how the information that Lobbyists provides is that lobbyists can present information in a way that supports their clients’ positions.

The lobbyist can be described as a person that  does the job of convincing legislatures and politicians on voting in a particular way.

Lobbyists are able to represent the views of people. They take the views to the legislators for consideration.

Read more on brainly.com/question/10791090?referrer=searchResults

6 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Is Louisiana’s law requiring racial segregation on its trains unconstitutional? why?
    11·1 answer
  • If you are convicted of a DUI you could lose your life savings paying fines or restitution to the people that you have injured o
    12·1 answer
  • 3 Points<br> Which of the following is a right of employees in the United States?
    12·1 answer
  • The phrases below summarize the primary goals of a political party.
    10·2 answers
  • What is police form and how does it help the world and the people?
    6·1 answer
  • Why should political parties have intra party elections
    11·1 answer
  • An arrest is considered a seizure under the what amendment?
    10·1 answer
  • Who appoints the justices? Who approves the justices? WHY?
    7·1 answer
  • When a correctional officer searches an inmate's cell, he or she is most likely looking for
    14·1 answer
  • 3. What events caused<br> the expansion of<br> national power in the<br> twentieth century?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!