-
2009
2009, Safford vs. Redding: While the strip-searching of a 13-year-old student by school authorities looking for drugs was a violation of her 4th Amendment rights, the officials who carried out the search were deemed immune from liability. -
1991
1991, County of Riverside vs. McLaughlin: A probable cause hearing for an arrestee can be combined with arraignment if conducted within 48 hours. -
1973
1973, Schneckloth vs. Bustamonte: The consent given police to search the car of a driver stopped for a traffic violation is valid even if the driver was unaware he had the right to refuse. -
1967
Katz vs. United States: The user of a public phone booth had an expectation of privacy; law enforcement needs a search warrant to electronically eavesdrop. -
2015
A man convicted on drug charges has been absolved of guilt by the nation's highest court, and the case sends a lesson to others. -
1868
1968, Terry vs. Ohio: The Exclusionary Rule, barring use of illegally obtained evidence against a defendant, cannot be invoked to exclude the products of legitimate and restrained police investigative techniques such as "stop and frisk" searches of outerwear. -
1991
1991, County of Riverside vs. McLaughlin: A probable cause hearing for an arrestee can be combined with arraignment if conducted within 48 hours. -
2002
2002, Board of Education vs. Earls: Tecumseh, Okla., school district authorities didn't need probable cause to suspect drug use by students required to submit to drug testing to participate in extracurricular activities. -
2010
2010, Ontario vs. Quon: The search of a city police officer's text messages by his government employer was reasonable because public employees don't have an expectation of privacy in using employer-provided telecommunication -
2008
2008, ACLU vs. NSA: Supreme Court denies review of a U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissal of the lawsuit challenging the National Security Agency's secret access to citizens' telecommunications records.
