Pubdate: Mon, 26 Jun 2006
Source: Ledger, The (FL)
Copyright: 2006 The Ledger
Contact:  http://www.theledger.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/795

COURT GIVES SEARCH LATITUDE

Gamble Rogers, the late Florida folksinger and story-teller, used to 
spin a hilarious tale about the execution of what he called an 
"Alabama search warrant." That, Rogers would say, is when the sheriff 
stands at the front door and knocks, whereupon the deputy standing at 
the back door yells "Come on in!"

But now the U.S. Supreme Court has spun a different kind of 
knock-knock joke, albeit not nearly so amusing. In this one, the 
sheriff doesn't even have to bother to knock. Just shout "Police!" 
and burst through the door.

The Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches of 
one's home simply doesn't mean much anymore. That's because this 
court seems less committed to protecting the constitutional rights of 
Americans than expanding the already fearsome authority of government 
to intrude upon our privacy.

In deciding, on a 5-4 vote, that police executing search warrants no 
longer have much incentive to observe a "knock-and-announce" rule 
that has its roots in 13th-century English common law, the court has 
fairly gutted the constitutional right of Americans to feel secure in 
the privacy of their own homes.

Indeed, so far as Justice Antonin Scalia, author of the majority 
opinion, is concerned, all that Fourth Amendment expectation really 
boiled down to was "the right not to be intruded upon in one's 
nightclothes." Reduced to such triviality, it was certainly not 
deemed to be of significant weight to offset the government's right 
to send squads of masked SWAT officers into private homes in the dead 
of night in search of evidence of criminal activity.

While officers are at least theoretically subject to punishment for 
improperly executing a search warrant, this decision for all 
practical purposes voids the "exclusionary rule" that prohibits the 
prosecution from using evidence that was seized illegally. That rule 
is the best incentive for officers to conduct searches within the 
confines of the law, because the fruits of the illegal search are of 
no value. The ruling is a disturbing indication that this new Supreme 
Court majority has a frightening bias toward government authoritarianism.

When even the formality of an "Alabama search warrant" is no longer 
deemed necessary, is the Fourth Amendment still worth the parchment 
it was printed on?
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman