Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports
Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This piece argues that the Supreme Court's April 2014 decision in Navarette v. Calfornia, like last Term's opinion in Florida v. Harris, deviates from longstanding Supreme Court precedent treating probable cause and reasonable suspicion as totality-of-the-circumstances tests. Instead, these two recent rulings essentially rely on rigid rules to define probable cause and reasonable suspicion. The article criticizes the Court for selectively endorsing bright-line tests that favor the prosecution, and argues that both decisions generate rules that oversimplify and therefore tend to be overinclusive.
Rights Of Passage: On Doors, Technology, And The Fourth Amendment, Irus Braverman
Rights Of Passage: On Doors, Technology, And The Fourth Amendment, Irus Braverman
Journal Articles
The importance of the door for human civilization cannot be overstated. In various cultures, the door has been a central technology for negotiating the distinction between inside and outside, private and public, and profane and sacred. By tracing the material and symbolic significance of the door in American Fourth Amendment case law, this article illuminates the vitality of matter for law’s everyday practices. In particular, it highlights how various door configurations affect the level of constitutional protections granted to those situated on the inside of the door and the important role of vision for establishing legal expectations of privacy. Eventually, …
Why So Contrived? Fourth Amendment Balancing, Per Se Rules, And Dna Databases After Maryland V. King, David H. Kaye
Why So Contrived? Fourth Amendment Balancing, Per Se Rules, And Dna Databases After Maryland V. King, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
In Maryland v. King, 133 S. Ct. 1958 (2013), the Supreme Court narrowly upheld the constitutionality of routine collection and storage of DNA samples and profiles from arrestees. In doing so, it stepped outside the usual framework that treats warrantless searches as per se unconstitutional unless they fall within specified exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirements. Instead, the Court balanced various individual and state interests. Yet, as regards the state interests, the Court confined this direct balancing analysis to the perceived value of using DNA to inform certain pretrial decisions. Oddly, it avoided relying directly on DNA’s …