October 16, 2018 Modern Issues in the U.S. Agenda: DO NOW: Supreme Court Case Matching NOTES #10: What rights does the Fourth Amendment protect? SCENARIO ANALYSIS: Fourth Amendment Legal Rights NOTES-CHECK #s 6–10 TODAY

What rights does the Fourth Amendment protect? Notes #10

The Fourth Amendment protects U. S The Fourth Amendment protects U.S. citizens against unreasonable (law enforcement) searches and seizures of personal property.

In order to search for or seize evidence or persons, law enforcement officers must have a proper warrant obtained with probable cause.

Various Supreme Court cases and rulings have helped interpret the Fourth Amendment:

1. In Ohio, the police receive information that a bombing suspect might be found in the home of a woman. Police officers go to the home and ask for permission to enter, but the woman refuses to admit them without a search warrant. The officers leave and then return, waving a piece of paper (that is not a search warrant), and break in the door. They don’t find the suspect but they do find child pornography in a suitcase. The woman is arrested, prosecuted, and found guilty for possession of child pornography. IS THIS LEGAL?

1. In the 1961 case Mapp v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained without a search warrant may not be admitted into court. Chief Justice Earl Warren Dollree Mapp (Warren) Supreme Court (1953–1969)

2. In California, a man uses a public pay phone booth to transmit illegal gambling wagers. Unbeknownst to the man, the F.B.I. is recording his conversations via an electronic eavesdropping device attached to the exterior of the phone booth. The man is convicted based on these recordings. IS THIS LEGAL?

2. In the 1962 case Katz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that wiretapping requires a search warrant because the Fourth Amendment protects privacy.

3. In New Jersey, a high school freshman is found smoking in the school bathroom. She is forced to open her purse and school officials find rolling papers, a pipe, a small amount of marijuana, and a list of students who owed the student money. The student is sentenced to one year probation. IS THIS LEGAL?

3. In the 1985 case New Jersey v. T. L. O 3. In the 1985 case New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court ruled that searches in schools do not require search warrants, in order to maintain discipline.

4. In Oregon, a school district adopts a random drug testing plan in which all student-athletes are required to submit to a drug test in order to participate in athletics. IS THIS LEGAL?

4. In the 1995 case Vernonia School District v 4. In the 1995 case Vernonia School District v. Acton, the Supreme Court ruled that schools can conduct random testing for drugs in student-athletes, in order to maintain safety.