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
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 is considering whether Trump’s Executive Order categorically barring transgender persons from serving in the military is unconstitutional.
Civil and Human Rights
February 19, 2025

History of the North Dakota Constitution Amicus Brief in Access Independent Health Services Inc., d/b/a Red River Women’s Clinic v. Wrigley

Center for Reproductive Rights
Amicus is the Constitutional Accountability Center, a think tank and public interest law firm dedicated...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Talbott v. Trump

In Talbott v. Trump, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is considering whether Trump’s Executive Order categorically barring transgender persons from serving in the military is unconstitutional. 
Civil and Human Rights
March 17, 2025

Equality and Protection: The Forgotten Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment

102 Denv. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2025)
Civil and Human Rights
North Dakota Supreme Court

Access Independent Health Services Inc. v. Wrigley

In Access Independent Health Services Inc. v. Wrigley, the North Dakota Supreme Court is considering whether North Dakota’s abortion ban violates the state constitution.