Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Recovering The Original Fourth Amendment, Thomas Y. Davies
Recovering The Original Fourth Amendment, Thomas Y. Davies
Michigan Law Review
Claims regarding the original or intended meaning of constitutional texts are commonplace in constitutional argument and analysis. All such claims are subject to an implicit validity criterion - only historically authentic assertions should matter. The rub is that the original meaning commonly attributed to a constitutional text may not be authentic. The historical Fourth Amendment is a case in point. If American judges, lawyers, or law teachers were asked what the Framers intended when they adopted the Fourth Amendment, they would likely answer that the Framers intended that all searches and seizures conducted by government officers must be reasonable given …
Why Liberals Should Chuck The Exclusionary Rule, Christopher Slobogin
Why Liberals Should Chuck The Exclusionary Rule, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This article makes the case against the exclusionary rule from a "liberal" perspective. Moving beyond the inconclusive empirical data on the efficacy of the rule, it uses behavioral and motivational theory to demonstrate why the rule is structurally unable to deter individual police officers from performing most unconstitutional searches and seizures. It also argues, contrary to liberal dogma, that the rule is poor at promoting Fourth Amendment values at the systemic, departmental level. Finally, the article contends that the rule stultifies liberal interpretation of the Fourth Amendment, in large part because of judicial heuristics that grow out of constant exposure …
Crimes And Errors Impossible To Commit: Defining Away The Fourth Amendment - Wyoming V. Houghton, Rachel Gader-Shafran
Crimes And Errors Impossible To Commit: Defining Away The Fourth Amendment - Wyoming V. Houghton, Rachel Gader-Shafran
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note contends that the Court's decision to adopt the Houghton approach to the automobile warrant exception is problematic for three reasons. First, the Court has erroneously interpreted the historical evidence behind the creation of the Fourth Amendment. Second, the Court, by chipping away at stare decisis, is disrupting the foundations of American jurisprudence and the development of the law. Third, by creating a new lexicon, changing the meanings of the words, the Court is trying to define away the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment. This Note will briefly summarize the facts of Houghton and review the historical purpose …