The Eroding Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights provides Americans with the right to be free from ‘unreasonable searches and seizures,’ as well as being protected from unwarranted collection of certain information. This right has been significantly qualified over the centuries since the nation’s founding, with the Supreme Court and the legislature finding significant exceptions to the warrant requirement in the 20th and 21st centuries. This article provides an overview of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in the United States, outlining how perceived ‘national threats’ have contributed to increasing surveillance not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Viewing these increasing exceptions through the lens of various ‘national threats’ from the ‘war on drugs’ in the late 20th century to the ‘war on terror’ and public fears about civil unrest in the 21st century, this article argues that there is no significant link between different modes of constitutional interpretation or political affiliation and the erosion of Fourth Amendment Privacy protections. Rather, this article argues that ‘national threats’ have placed more power into the hands of law enforcement over time, and that new technologies have increased the amount of information that can be collected without a warrant as the courts and the legislature fail to protect against warrantless surveillance.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
St Andrews Law Journal
Published
2025-04-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15664/stalj.v4i1.2855
Primary Topic
Criminal Law and Evidence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Eroding Fourth Amendment

Greta Shope
St Andrews Law Journal
Criminal Law and Evidence
article

The Eroding Fourth Amendment

Greta Shope
article en

Abstract

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights provides Americans with the right to be free from ‘unreasonable searches and seizures,’ as well as being protected from unwarranted collection of certain information. This right has been significantly qualified over the centuries since the nation’s founding, with the Supreme Court and the legislature finding significant exceptions to the warrant requirement in the 20th and 21st centuries. This article provides an overview of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in the United States, outlining how perceived ‘national threats’ have contributed to increasing surveillance not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Viewing these increasing exceptions through the lens of various ‘national threats’ from the ‘war on drugs’ in the late 20th century to the ‘war on terror’ and public fears about civil unrest in the 21st century, this article argues that there is no significant link between different modes of constitutional interpretation or political affiliation and the erosion of Fourth Amendment Privacy protections. Rather, this article argues that ‘national threats’ have placed more power into the hands of law enforcement over time, and that new technologies have increased the amount of information that can be collected without a warrant as the courts and the legislature fail to protect against warrantless surveillance.

St Andrews Law JournalVol. 4(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Criminal Law and Evidence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.