2.2 Civil Liberties 4th 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments

4th Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Exclusionary Rule The exclusionary rule prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution.   The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment.  The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that the exclusionary rule applies to improperly elicited self-incriminatory statements gathered in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and to evidence gained in situations where the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.  However, the rule does not apply in civil cases, including deportation hearings.

Good Faith If officers had reasonable, good faith belief that they were acting according to legal authority, such as by relying on a search warrant that is later found to have been legally defective, the illegally seized evidence is admissible under this rule.

Probable Cause sufficient reason based upon known facts to believe a crime has been committed or that certain property is connected with a crime

Reasonable Suspicion an objectively justifiable suspicion that is based on specific facts or circumstances and that justifies stopping and sometimes searching (as by frisking) a person thought to be involved in criminal activity at the time More than just a hunch, but less than probable cause

4th Amendment Cases Mapp v. Ohio

5th Amendment No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Self Incrimination The act of implicating oneself in a crime or exposing oneself to criminal prosecution. Self-incrimination may occur as a result of interrogation or may be made voluntarily. 

Double Jeopardy protections in the U.S. Constitution keep criminal defendants from facing prosecution more than once for the same offense (with a few exceptions)

Eminent Domain the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation.

5th Amendment Cases Miranda v. Arizona Kohl v. United States (1875) For approximately the first 100 years in U.S. history, eminent domain lay dormant. In Kohl v. United States, the court ruled that the federal government could seize private property within the states, with just compensation, to build a post office and other government buildings. Justice William Strong emphasized that the federal government’s eminent domain power was “essential to its independent existence and perpetuity.”

6th Amendment In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

6th Amendment Cases Gideon v. Wainwright

8th Amendment Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Question Does government regulation of firearms and collection of digital metadata, promote or interfere with public safety and individual rights? How are the 4th-8th amendments meant to protect citizens rights against the need for social order and security

Other Civil Liberty Cases Plessy . Ferguson Brown v. Board of Education Buckley V. Valeo Baker V. Carr Shaw . Reno