Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: Supreme Court: Victory for Fourth Amendment in Caniglia

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court this morning issued a ruling in Caniglia v. Strom, holding that the Fourth Amendment does not allow police to enter homes and conduct searches and seizures without a warrant under a generalized “community caretaking” rationale.

Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

Today’s opinion by Justice Thomas for a unanimous Court was spot-on. While the Court has allowed warrantless searches of vehicles in some situations under a “community caretaking” rationale, today’s opinion recognizes that “what is reasonable for vehicles is different from what is reasonable for homes.” The “caretaking” function that police officers are often called upon to perform is not “an open-ended license” to invade the privacy of the home.

These points echo the main arguments in our brief, namely that the Fourth Amendment’s framers provided broad protections against unbridled searches and seizures in large part to preserve the privacy and security of the home. The lower court’s ruling could not be squared with that text and founding history, and the Supreme Court today was right to issue this important correction.

#

Resources:

CAC’s case page in Caniglia v. Stromhttps://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/caniglia-v-strom/

“In wake of Floyd, Taylor killings, should police have power to enter your home without a warrant?,” David Gans, USA Today, March 22, 2021: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/policing/2021/03/22/should-police-have-power-enter-your-home-without-warrant-column/4714469001/

CAC Alert (VIDEO), Miriam Becker-Cohen, March 24, 2021: https://www.theusconstitution.org/blog/cac-alert-caniglia-v-strom/

RELEASE: Reaction to DOJ filing in Caniglia v. Strom, February 24, 2021: https://www.theusconstitution.org/news/release-reaction-to-doj-filing-in-caniglia-v-strom/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
June 20, 2025

CAC Release: Purporting to Effectuate “Pure Textualism,” Supreme Court Guts ADA’s Protections for Retirees, Neglecting Critical Statutory Context and History

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Stanley v. City of...
Civil and Human Rights
June 18, 2025

CAC Release: Supreme Court’s Conservative Supermajority Allows Tennessee to Flout Constitution’s Equal Protection Guarantee

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in United States v. Skrmetti,...
Civil and Human Rights
July 14, 2025

Debate over transgender rights grows more fraught in new Trump era

The Christian Science Monitor
Actions by the Trump administration have been pushing back on transgender inclusion, amid sharp public...
Civil and Human Rights
March 19, 2025

Viewpoint: The North Dakota Constitution’s protections include reproductive autonomy

North Dakota's Grand Forks Herald
The Court should live up to North Dakota’s history as a state with some of...
By: Nargis Aslami
Civil and Human Rights
February 27, 2025

What You Should Know About the Right to Protection in the Trump Era

Washington Monthly
The 14th Amendment was meant to enforce the laws equally, not put vulnerable populations in...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Shilling v. Trump

In Shilling v. Trump, the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington considered whether Trump’s Executive Order categorically barring transgender persons from serving in the military is unconstitutional.