BU Fourth Amendment of The United States Constitution Q&A Discussion #1.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:
“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.”
— United States Constitution, Amendment IV.
What does the Fourth Amendment protect?: “Persons,” “Houses,” “Papers,” and “Effects.” What counts as “Persons,” “Houses,” “Papers,” and “Effects.” These questions of interpretation are the questions lawyers and judges argue over to determine the meaning of the Constitution.
Regarding “persons” – what about a person’s clothes? (yes), how about the wallet they are carrying? (yes), how about a person’s blood or bodily fluid? (yes).
Regarding “houses” – what about an apartment? (yes), your front porch? (probably), a mobile home? (maybe depending on
whether it is being used as a home or a car).
Regarding “papers” – what about a diary? (yes), a book in your house? (yes), your email? (maybe), your text messages?
(maybe).
Regarding “effects” – what about your backpack? (yes), your collection of comics? (yes).
Okay, just to make sure you’re following along, check what the 4th Amendment allows people to be secure in. Mark all that apply.
Select one or more:
a. houses
b. persons
c. objects
d. accounts
e. papers
f. effects
#2
•Who does the Fourth Amendment protect?: “The right of the people” — All those who live under the protections of the Constitution. Does that include “citizens”? (yes). Does that include children under 18? (yes). How about undocumented immigrants? (yes).
• What does the Fourth Amendment protect those people from? “Against unreasonable searches or seizures” by the government. In determining what is an “unreasonable” search or seizure, courts look to balance individual liberty within the need to keep an ordered society. Figuring out what is reasonable or unreasonable is one of the central challenges of the Fourth Amendment.
• What about justified intrusions by the government? The second part of the Fourth Amendment talks about “no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause.” A warrant is a formal document signed by a judge that allows police to search or arrest you. Warrants allow law enforcement officer who have reason to suspect you (“probable cause”) to ask a judge for permission to interfere with your privacy. Thus, if a warrant is supported by enough specific information, the government can search you, or your house, or even arrest you.
Can someone’s house be searched if a law enforcement officer has a warrant to search their house?
Select one:
a. Yes.
b. No.
#3
As you sit at your computer you are carrying your “effects.” You have personal belongings in your pocket, purse, or backpack – essentially your stuff. What right do you have to keep your stuff private? Does it change depending on where you are (home, school,
courtroom, airplane)? Does it change depending on what it is that you are trying to keep private? That’s the question and the challenge of the Fourth Amendment.
Think of a list of items you might have with your right now…. These items might include:
• Books.
• Notes.
• Phone.
• Keys.
• Wallets
• Identification cards.
• Medicines.
• Make up.
• Religious materials.
• A small pocket knife.
• Receipts.
• Your grades.
These are your “effects” (although some are arguably “papers”), we know you are engaged in a school activity, and the question is: Does the Constitution protect these “effects” from unreasonable searches or seizures without a warrant based on probable cause?
The answer depends on whether you have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in the items. In most Fourth Amendment cases, the question will be whether that “reasonable expectation” was violated by the unreasonable actions of government agents or officials.
Two questions arise:
1. First, do you actually expect privacy in your effects that you bring with you?
2. Second, is this expectation of privacy one that others agree is reasonable?
Answer this question regarding expectation of privacy:
Assume you are having the same conversation with a friend. Where would you have the greatest expectation of privacy?
Select one:
a. Loudly laughing in the student union.
b. Speaking in class.
c. Yelling at a basketball game.
d. Whispering in the woods near campus.
#4
In 1967, the Supreme Court had to address whether or not “bugging” a conversation from a local pay phone was an “unreasonable” search or seizure.
Charles Katz was a rather unsavory character who was involved in an illegal gambling operation. To further his betting, he regularly used a particular payphone on a particular street in Los Angeles to make phone calls to Miami and Boston. The F.B.I suspected Katz of running the gambling operation and, thus, placed an electronic surveillance device (a “bug”) on the payphone to record his calls. Based on the calls, Katz was arrested and in court he challenged the use of the calls saying that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the “search” of his conversations. Katz claimed he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the conversations.
Do you think that Katz’s had a reasonable expectation of privacy? Explain your answer. (you can get full credit for saying “yes” or “no” as long as you explain your answer.
#5
So you have an expectation of privacy in what you possess and in what you say to others – how about in what you throw away? You know what you have in your backpacks or home, but what about the stuff you throw in the trash everyday?
What if police suspected someone of illegal dealings – could the police search their trash to develop evidence against them?
Do you think people have an expectation of privacy of their garbage? Explain your answer.