U.S. Supreme Court inclined to expand warrantless entry into homes

I'm not worried. A case before the SCOTUS is just that - a case. The final ruling will not allow cops to enter a home without a warrant unless lives are at risk.

The cop in the example was wrong. The cop was trespassing if there wasn't imminent danger.

There are strong "rights" in the US when someone is inside their own home. We don't even have to talk with police when they knock if we don't want. It is only if they have a valid, signed, warrant where the tables turn.

Hot pursuit doesn't matter. Surround the house, write a warrant showing probable cause for entrance, get a judge to sign it, then return and knock.

Cops definitely don't know every felony vs non-felony act on sight. It is impossible to tell sometimes. Many felonies are tied to the person doing them, not the act itself.

Bob Fosse Today  05:59 pm JST

I agree with you Bass. Wow...I need a moment....

Ha! ;)

I see a lot of problems arising from this....

I agree with you Bass. Wow...I need a moment....

Oh dear.....

More bs excuse no-knock warrants by officers in “hot pursuit” (Honestly judge, I thought the clearly marked box of Duncan doughnuts was drugs and I follows him in hot pursuit!”

More Breona Taylors, and not for nothing, more cops getting shot.

Way back in 96, in my home state of KS., the Topeka police executed a no-knock warrant on a “drug-den”. Problem is they got the address wrong, busted down a difrrernt stoner’s door (he was not a dealer, just a “regular” user), scared the bejesus out of him.

As the Police failed to announce themselves and as home invasions in this part of town were not unheard of, stoner-dude emptied his gun as he ran for his life and shot and killed the lead officer through the door.

Jury acquitted him.

Increasing the ability of police to enter without a warrant is ripe for abuse and is bad policy for everyone involved.

The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

The fourth amendment cannot be clearer.

A slippery slope if I ever fell down one.

Leave well alone.   

But Erica Ross, arguing on behalf of the Biden administration, urged the court to side with officers, arguing that a “suspect's decision to bring a public encounter to the home diminishes any privacy interests he may have there.”

An absurd supposition

I don't believe for a second that police officers do not know the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony. If that is indeed true then this is a failure of their training that is properly remedied through better training. Diminishing the rights of citizens because police officers are lazy or sloppy is not acceptable in a nation that claims to protect the rights of its citizens.

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.

I often joke that the only Amendments that Americans seem to think exist are just the 1st and 2nd, but it's not really a joke at all.

 I would suggest TIGHTENING the rules on warrantless entry to only when a life is in danger. 

Those would be my thoughts.

No knock warrants are typically an arrest warrant, or where there is a risk of evidence being destroyed. I don't see that this case would have any effect on no knock warrants, but no knock warrants are issued too freely and without sufficient time spent to make sure the information is correct.

Is the supreme court preparing the nation to a dictatorial rule? One cannot believe such thing can happen in a country that highly treasures 'liberal democracy'.

What a mockery..

Sheriff Buford T. Justice approves, especially if he has crossed multiple state lines while in HOT PURSUIT.

/s

Police already have too much power. I would suggest TIGHTENING the rules on warrantless entry to only when a life is in danger. And if, later, that proves not to be the case, that there can be no criminal arrest based on the illegal entry. Ditto for "no knock" warrants- there has to be life at risk, not just property or possible evidence of a crime.

Several justices, both liberal and conservative, suggested that making a distinction between felony and misdemeanor cases would be difficult and problematic.

I see a lot of problems arising from this....

Your dog barks loudly and too long, and disappears into the house when the police arrive. So then the police should be allowed to break down the front door, shoot all the dogs and cats they encounter, maybe shoot the homeowner who reacts badly to the entry, and then the family loses the house, the car in the garage, and everything else to asset forfeiture when they discover that the son is growing marijuana in a state where it is legal.

Wonderful.

This is bad.