SCOTUS Rules Cops DO NOT Need A Warrant To Search Your Home

In YouTube Posts by Hlarson4 Comments

 

 

Join #FOWLERNATION!! http://bit.ly/SubscribeFowlerNation
In another devastating blow to freedom, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police don’t need a warrant to search your property. As long as two occupants disagree about allowing officers to enter, and the resident who refuses access is then arrested, police may enter the residence.

“Instead of adhering to the warrant requirement,” Ginsburg wrote, “today’s decision tells the police they may dodge it, nevermind ample time to secure the approval of a neutral magistrate.” Tuesday’s ruling, she added, “shrinks to petite size our holding in Georgia v. Randolph.”

Georgia v. Randolph was a similar case the Supreme Court addressed in 2006, in which a domestic violence suspect would not allow police to enter his home, though his wife did offer police consent. The police ultimately entered the home. The Court ruled in the case that the man’s refusal while being present in the home should have kept authorities from entering.

“A physically present inhabitant’s express refusal of consent to a police search [of his home] is dispositive as to him, regardless of the consent of a fellow occupant,” the majority ruled in that case.

The majority, led by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., said police need not take the time to get a magistrate’s approval before entering a home in such cases. But dissenters, led by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, warned that the decision would erode protections against warrantless home searches. The court had previously held that such protections were at the “very core” of the 4th Amendment and its ban on unreasonable searches and seizures, reports the LA Times.

According to the AP, Justice Samuel Alito wrote the court’s 6-3 decision holding that an occupant may not object to a search when he is not at home.

“We therefore hold that an occupant who is absent due to a lawful detention or arrest stands in the same shoes as an occupant who is absent for any other reason,” Alito said.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/supr…

3 Steps To Join #FowlerNation!
1. Subscribe To The Fowler Show:
http://bit.ly/SubscribeFowlerNation
2. ‘Like’ The Richard Fowler Show on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/RichardFowler…
3. ‘Follow’ Us on Twitter
http://www.twitter.com/fowlershow

If you liked this clip, share it with your friends and hit that “like” button!

1,500 Subscriber Behind The Scenes Reward Video –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT9x1P…

Subscribe to our Podcast on iTunes for free!
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/t…

@fowlershow
@richardafowler
http://www.facebook.com/richardfowler…
http://www.fowlershow.com

Comments

  1. How does this site call itself news? There are no facts in here. What was the name of the case? You mention Georgia v Randolph, but that was the case from eight years ago. There are no quotes from the majority, and only a short one from the dissent. Instead, you have a stuttering anchor who chooses to name drop and speak opinions. This is a joke.

    1. Fernandez vs California is the case that this was voted on. this isn’t a clear break down of the ruling…

Leave a Comment