{"id":113695,"date":"2021-05-17T15:37:58","date_gmt":"2021-05-17T19:37:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/valorguardians.com\/blog\/?p=113695"},"modified":"2021-05-17T16:41:09","modified_gmt":"2021-05-17T20:41:09","slug":"scotus-ruled-on-caniglia-v-strom","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=113695","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS ruled on Caniglia v. Strom"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-111184\" src=\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/scotus-300x240.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"240\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/scotus-300x240.png 300w, https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/scotus-416x333.png 416w, https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/scotus.png 765w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>penguinman000 sends us the news that SCOTUS has found that \u201ccommunity caretaking\u201d exception violates the Forth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure of private property, and sets probable cause for search warrants.<\/p>\n<h3>SCOTUS Rules Police Cannot Search Homes Without Warrants in the Name of &#8216;Community Caretaking&#8217;<\/h3>\n<p><strong>BY\u00a0MADELEINE CARLISLE<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Monday that an exception to the Fourth Amendment for \u201ccommunity caretaking\u201d does not allow police to enter and search a home without a warrant.<\/p>\n<p>The \u201ccommunity caretaking\u201d exception originated from a 1973 case, Cady v. Dombrowski, in which an officer took a gun out of an impounded car without a warrant. The Supreme Court ruled at the time that police can conduct such warrantless searches if they are performing \u201ccommunity caretaking functions\u201d in a \u201creasonable\u201d manner.<\/p>\n<p>Monday\u2019s ruling, in the case Caniglia v. Strom, centered on whether that exception also justifies warrantless searches of homes. In a 9-0 ruling, the court decided that it does not.<\/p>\n<p>While Cady recognized that police perform \u201cmany civil tasks\u201d in modern society, the \u201crecognition that these tasks exist\u201d is not \u201can open-ended license to perform them anywhere,\u201d Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority opinion. \u201cThe Fourth Amendment protects \u2018[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,\u2019\u201d he continued.<\/p>\n<p>As Justice Samuel Alito noted in his concurrence, Monday\u2019s ruling does not apply to another Fourth Amendment exception known as the \u201cexigent circumstances\u201d exception, which allows police to enter homes without a warrant to help \u201can injured occupant or to protect an occupant from imminent injury.\u2019\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Conservative Union Foundation had joined the Cato Institute to file a joint brief urging the court to keep the community caretaking exception \u201cconfined to its historic vehicle-related origins\u201d and reject a broader standard that \u201cwould give police free rein to enter the home without probable cause or a warrant.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>On Monday, the Supreme Court did just that<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Rack one, or at least most of one, up for the good guys. Thanks, penn.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/time.com\/6048974\/supreme-court-police-warrants-caniglia-strom\/\">Time Link<\/a><\/p>\n<p>For the legal eagles on board: https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/20pdf\/20-157_8mjp.pdf<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>penguinman000 sends us the news that SCOTUS has found that \u201ccommunity caretaking\u201d exception violates the Forth &hellip; <a title=\"SCOTUS ruled on Caniglia v. Strom\" class=\"hm-read-more\" href=\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=113695\"><span class=\"screen-reader-text\">SCOTUS ruled on Caniglia v. Strom<\/span>Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":657,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[406,295],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-113695","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-guest-link","category-scotus"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113695","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/657"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=113695"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113695\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":113705,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113695\/revisions\/113705"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=113695"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=113695"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=113695"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}