enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the...

    The Bill of Rights in the National Archives. The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights.It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be ...

  3. Thompson v. Clark - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_v._Clark

    Following the dismissal of his criminal charges, Thompson filed suit against the officers responsible for arresting him under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and alleging, among other things, that he had been maliciously prosecuted in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, which provided the right against unlawful seizures.

  4. Qualified immunity - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity

    Qualified immunity frequently arises in civil rights cases, [6] particularly in lawsuits arising under 42 USC § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971). [7] Under 42 USC § 1983, a plaintiff can sue for damages when state officials violate their constitutional rights or other federal rights. The text of 42 USC § 1983 reads as ...

  5. Katz v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katz_v._United_States

    Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court redefined what constitutes a "search" or "seizure" with regard to the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

  6. Monroe v. Pape - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_v._Pape

    The case was significant because it held that 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a statutory provision from 1871, could be used to sue state officers who violated a plaintiff's constitutional rights. [ 3 ] § 1983 had previously been a relatively obscure and little-used statute, but since Monroe it has become a central part of United States civil rights law.

  7. Oliver v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_v._United_States

    United States, 466 U.S. 170 (1984), is a United States Supreme Court decision relating to the open fields doctrine limiting the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Background [ edit ]

  8. Substantive due process - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantive_due_process

    Following the Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause prompted substantive due process interpretations to be urged on the Supreme Court as a limitation on state legislation. Initially, however, the Supreme Court rejected substantive due process as it came to be understood, including in the seminal Slaughter-House Cases . [ 18 ]

  9. Digital Search and Seizure - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Search_and_Seizure

    The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects against unreasonable search and seizure. Originally, remote surveillance of a person's communications, such as a telephone call, was not considered search and seizure without an "actual physical invasion" of a defendant's property. [1]