What is Katz argument: The Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations and that a physical intrusion into the area he occupied was unnecessary to bring the Amendment into play. "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places," wrote Justice Potter Stewart for the Court.
What is the Katz v United States holding: The Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations and that a physical intrusion into the area he occupied was unnecessary to bring the Amendment into play. "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places," wrote Justice Potter Stewart for the Court.
Answer: B.
Explanation: Tucked under the windshield wiper
Answer: when a person performs work or services under certain conditions in return for remuneration
Explanation:
Answer:
The Court decided Dred Scott in 1817 at a time when political tensions about slavery ran high. In that case, the Supreme Court held that no African-American could be a citizen entitled to sue in federal court and that no African-American could become free simply because he was taken into a free state by his owner.
Explanation: