Join our growing community to challenge mainstream media bias and fix the news
Supreme Court to hear arguments on warrantless ’hot pursuits’

Supreme Court to hear arguments on warrantless ’hot pursuits’

The US Supreme Court observed that officers don’t need a warrant to enter a home when they are in ’hot pursuit of a fleeing felon.’ However, it is still to decide whether the protection to individuals under the Fourth Amendment extends to such entries in homes of suspects of minor crimes. Justice Stephen Breyer remarked that the court was presented with a ’tough case’ that has a ’cruel trilemma.’

Nunya 1 months

The constitution isn't worth the paper it was written on. Nobody abides by it anyway. It's useless to restrain the power of government

I think
I think 1 months

Who are they planning to have executed?

Mutatis 1 months

“The problem with trying to separate misdemeanor and felony is that different states have different rules and different crimes that count as misdemeanors,” Justice Stephen Breyer said during arguments Then the states can shift their own laws according to their individual concerns. Just because there is variation in the distinction does not mean the distinction should not exist. Under this rationale, why not consider all crimes felonies and get rid of the premise for misdemeanors entirely?

Top in U.S.