The Fourth Amendment

Article VI

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." -U.S. Constitutional Amendments

Preface

I choose the fourth amendment for two reasons:

- It recognizes a right that, inevitably, cannot be taken away from a person.

- It was not written out of spite, but out of experience.

I personally feel like this is an issue that, had there not been a provision in the Constitution, would have created some serious issues with the colonists. The Fourth Amendment also almost gives the idea that there should be no problem with a person leaving his/her door unlocked, for the fellow citizens should honor the space of one another.

History

The Fourth Amendment came almost directly from experience of the colonials. But it wasn't introduced only as a fundamental right, but also as a major part of the English ideals as well. In England, ''Everyman's house is his castle'' was an honored phrase, enforcing the idea that it is not only is it a law, but a right that cannot be delegated by any government idea. There are two major cases where this idea was tried. Semayne's Case and Entick v. Carrington.

Semayne's Case

Accused of denying access to officials, Semayne exercised the right of a homeowner to defend his house against unlawful entry, even if by King agents, while also recognizing the right of appropriate officers to enter upon notice to arrest or to carry out the King's demand. This case made people think about reasoning for entering one's home. There were certain "guidelines" drawn up such as murder in self-defense and the allowance of a Sheriff to enter if the door is already open).

Entick v. Carrington

One of the most famous cases that influenced the Fourth Amendment was that of Entick v. Carrington. This was only one of many civil cases against officials who raided people's homes and other places in search of materials connected with John Wilkes' political pamphlets that attack both the government and the King. Mr. Entick, who was an associate of John Wilkes, sued because agents had entered his house forcefully and broken into desks and boxes that were locked. They then seized pamphlets, charts, and other printed materials. The courts decided the warrant gave the officials the right to search and seizure and the ability to issue a warrant for all a person's papers rather than only those accused of being criminal ''contrary to the genius of the law of England.'' The warrant was said to be invalid because it had no probable cause and no record was made of what had been seized. The Supreme Court has said this case is a guide to understanding what the Framers meant when writing the Fourth Amendment.

Putting the Amendment to Use

The reasoning for such an amendment was obvious. What the amendment really expresses are the rights to officials and people alike. An official can lawfully enter a home and remove possessions without the owner knowing if allowed a warrant. Without a warrant, the owner can refuse entrance by an official into the home.

Search and Seizure

In compliance with the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant must thoroughly describe the place to be searched and the people or things to be seized. The purpose of this "specifics" requirement is to avoid a general search that would allow an official to simply rummage through a person's belongings. A sufficiently particular warrant describes the items that should be seized in a way that leaves