Search and Seizure and the Rehnquist Court

Paper Summary:

This paper is a historical and substantive analysis of the interpretation and application of search and seizure law by the Supreme Court with a significant emphasis placed on the analysis of political and social pressures and responsibilities of the Court and how they thus respond. The landmark cases of Terry vs. Ohio, Mapp vs. Ohio, Bostick vs. Florida, and Weeks vs. United States, are utilized to demonstrate the effect external pressures on the Court. Additionally, much emphasis is given to the development of arguments in opposition to alarmist and reactionary crime control models, including the development of the Department of Homeland Security.

From the Paper:

"The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States provides a vehicle whereby each American citizen may be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The relatively straightforward articulation of the Fourth Amendment, as well as the implied meanings its words may hold, continues to be a volatile, emotional topic of significant political and judicial debate. Insomuch as the balance between personal civil liberty and state security treads a fine line between fairness and injustice, as so does the tolerance of a free people to be restrained in the exercise of their freedom. Those citizens well served by the relentless security initiatives of American legislators and bureaucratic agencies hold utmost regard for its criminal justice authority. However, many other citizens foster both a growing contempt and suspicion of the intentions of an ever-infringing American government."

More papers on Search and Seizure and the Rehnquist Court:

• Research Paper # 146080 : "Clothing and Fashion of the Heian Court"
• Comparison Essay # 71073 : "Criminal Courts in D.C. and the World Court"
• Argumentative Essay # 91444 : "The Supreme Court and Public Opinion"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: