Arguments Against The 4th Amendment

Before the 20th century, there were few, if any, cases based on the Fourth Amendment. However, as surveillance by law enforcers became more common, these tactics, and others, were scrutinized in court cases throughout the 20th and 21st century. Within the past 50 years there have been more and more cases held to determine whether or not a citizen’s right were being violated or if authorities were within the law. Like a story with multiple timelines, the outcome of a case disputing the fourth amendment is not always clear or predictable.

PII
Like many of the other amendments, already established traditions of British law supported the concept of the IV Amendment. It was required for government agents to obtain a warrant to legally search

In 2009, Alonzo King, Jr. was arrested for violent assault charges and while in custody, the police took his DNA and logged into the Maryland DNA Database. His DNA was matched to the DNA in an unsolved rape case. The Maryland DNA Collection Act (MDCA) allows police officers to collect DNA samples of people under arrest for violent crimes or attempted violent crimes. However, in court, King appealed to have the conviction because the MDCA was against his IV amendment rights because his DNA was taken without a search warrant. The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the conviction stating that the MDCA was infact unconstitutional, because King’s expectation of privacy was greater than the interest of Maryland in using DNA samples for the purpose of identification. Maryland v. King was taken to the Supreme Court where the Court of Appeals ruling was reversed, because the judges believed DNA testing was in the legitimate interest of the state and was part of an arrest procedure, so therefore does not require a warrant. Another incident questioned when a warrant was needed during a traffic