FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3125996413> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3125996413 startingPage "881" @default.
• W3125996413 abstract "IntroductionFew constitutional commands offer less textual guidance than Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable search and seizure.1 One scholar called this phrase most unhelpful guidepost one could have concocted .... [Reasonableness as an analytical concept is maddeningly frustrating.2 It may come as little surprise that Fourth Amendment doctrine, constructed with so little textual guidance, strikes many as chaotic; numerous commentators have long regarded Fourth Amendment doctrine as deeply confused, if not chaotic.3 Identifying an intelligible principle to animate concept of constitutional is accordingly of considerable importance. A principled and coherent Fourth Amendment jurisprudence surely requires an equally principled and coherent conception of Fourth Amendment reasonableness.Justice Brennan once famously identified protection for criticism of official conduct as the central meaning of First Amendment,4 a point to which Court repeatedly turned in subsequent doctrinal evolution of constitutional protection for freedom of speech.5 Fourth Amendment jurisprudence would surely benefit if a similar polestar were identified. To be sure, some commentators, most prominently Cass Sunstein, argue for judicial minimalism-narrow and incompletely theorized decisions that can enhance deliberative democracy and reduce risks of error.6 Even Professor Sunstein, however, does not embrace minimalism when its consequence is doctrinal confusion.7 Sometimes, an incompletely theorized decision may be a virtue; on other occasions, it may produce chaos.The need for doctrinal coherence is particularly great at present, when Fourth Amendment law faces so many challenges borne of advancing technology. Consider what some courts and commentators have called a search, in which an investigative technique discloses no more than probable cause to believe a particular location otherwise hidden from public contains contraband.8 At present, issues relating to binary searches arise most frequently in litigation about whether Fourth Amendment permits use of trained narcotics-detection dogs to determine whether contraband is present in a location otherwise concealed from public view.9 The binary search is not limited to this context, however, and will become of increasing import; any technological advance that enables authorities to identify presence of contraband in an otherwise concealed location would present same constitutional question, such as potential development of a computer search program that could identify location of illegal materials, such as pirated software or child pornography, on any computer connected to Internet.Justice Frankfurter, for one, saw need for an animating principle to guide Fourth Amendment doctrine.10 F or him, central meaning of Fourth Amendment, derived from its history, was that when discretion is afforded to law-enforcement officers to engage in search and seizure, it is all too likely to be abused, and accordingly searches and seizures not previously authorized by a warrant should be condemned in absence of strict necessity.11 For a time, Justice Frankfurter's position seemed ascendant, as when Court took position that search and seizure is constitutionally reasonable only if authorized by warrant or falling within one of limited exceptions to warrant requirement.12 This insistence on warrants as a vehicle to curb official discretion, however, did not prosper in subsequent Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Perhaps central problem is that a warrant preference is difficult to square with Fourth Amendment's text, which, rather than preferring warrants, expressly limits authority of courts to issue them, and otherwise requires no more than that search and seizure be reasonable.13 In its landmark decision in Terry v. Ohio,14 Court acknowledged textual difficulty with a warrant requirement, observing that, although text of Fourth Amendment forbids issuance of a warrant in absence of probable cause, when police act without a warrant, there is 'no ready test for determining reasonableness other than by balancing need to search [or seize] against invasion which search [or seizure] entails. …" @default.
• W3125996413 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3125996413 creator A5058231301 @default.
• W3125996413 date "2014-03-01" @default.
• W3125996413 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W3125996413 title "Binary Searches and the Central Meaning of the Fourth Amendment" @default.
• W3125996413 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W3125996413 type Work @default.
• W3125996413 sameAs 3125996413 @default.
• W3125996413 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3125996413 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3125996413 hasAuthorship W3125996413A5058231301 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C18650270 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConcept C71043370 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C144024400 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C17744445 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C18650270 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C199539241 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C2776211767 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C2778272461 @default.
• W3125996413 hasConceptScore W3125996413C71043370 @default.
• W3125996413 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W3125996413 hasLocation W31259964131 @default.
• W3125996413 hasOpenAccess W3125996413 @default.
• W3125996413 hasPrimaryLocation W31259964131 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1496808586 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1534661691 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1535806947 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1552198557 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1554008520 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1556960008 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1924587017 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W204400269 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W2307535828 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W2332129771 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W2962061847 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W2995504254 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3122003831 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3122059726 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3122080278 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3124527720 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3124891764 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3159428376 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W3171974320 @default.
• W3125996413 hasRelatedWork W1697644554 @default.
• W3125996413 hasVolume "22" @default.
• W3125996413 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3125996413 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3125996413 magId "3125996413" @default.
• W3125996413 workType "article" @default.