Vile, pgs. 333-335 (Intro to Second, Third and Fourth Amendments)

Chapter Eleven: Second, Third, and Fourth Amendments

Overview of Amendments

  • Few Supreme Court decisions address the Second and Third Amendments.

  • The Third Amendment is rarely litigated due to infrequent government billeting of troops in private houses.

  • The Second Amendment is highly contentious due to gun ownership and violence in the U.S.

Second Amendment

  • Debate on Interpretation:

    • Some view the right to bear arms as outdated, linked to state militias.

    • Others argue for it as an individual right akin to other rights in the Bill of Rights.

  • Notable Supreme Court Cases:

    • United States v. Lopez (1995): Suggested the need for direct Supreme Court resolution on the Second Amendment.

    • District of Columbia v. Heller (2008):

      • Struck down strict gun control laws, confirming personal rights under the Second Amendment.

      • Supreme Court ruled in favor of individual gun ownership rights.

    • McDonald v. Chicago (2010):

      • Extended the Second Amendment’s limitations to state and local governments.

      • Anticipation of more cases regarding the Second Amendment's scope.

Third Amendment

  • Very limited case law, largely due to historical context.

  • Focus on government billeting of troops in homes without consent.

Fourth Amendment

  • Key Concepts:

    • Concerns about unreasonable searches and seizures.

    • Requires specific procedures for obtaining search warrants.

  • Distinction Between Searches:

    • Courts distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable warrantless searches.

    • Examples of allowed warrantless searches include:

      • "Stop and frisk" by police officers.

      • Searches in pursuit of fleeing felons.

      • Plain view searches.

  • Case Law Examples:

    • Schmerber v. California (1966): Allowed warrantless blood tests in DUI cases.

    • Missouri v. McNeely (2013): Confirmed no blanket exemption for warrantless searches.

Evolution of Legal Interpretations

  • Technological Developments:

    • The Fourth Amendment’s application in the context of electronic surveillance.

    • Initial view in Olmstead v. United States (1928) stated no violation without physical trespass.

    • Reversal in Katz v. United States (1967) mandated warrant requirements for electronic surveillance.

  • Exclusionary Rule:

    • Developed to deter illegal police activities.

    • Initially applied to the federal government in Weeks v. United States (1914); extended to states in Mapp v. Ohio (1961).

    • Exceptions include reasonable good faith by officers (United States v. Leon (1984)) and inevitable discovery (Nix v. Williams (1984)).

Special Circumstances and Recent Cases

  • Relaxed standards in school settings, as seen in New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985).

  • Recent cases addressing drug testing in schools and sensitive positions.

    • Limits indicated in Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding (2009).

  • Vehicle Searches:

    • Courts generally apply relaxed standards compared to home searches.

Important Case: District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

  • Facts:

    • D.C. banned handguns in homes, required other weapons to be inoperable.

  • Questions:

    • (a) Does the Second Amendment protect individual firearm possession?

    • (b) Did the D.C. ordinance deny this right?

  • Decisions:

    • (a) Yes; (b) Yes.

  • Reasoning by Justice Scalia:

    • Constitutional text should be interpreted in a normal, ordinary sense.

    • The Amendment has a prefatory clause linking to an operative clause, which does not limit its scope.

    • Emphasized that "the right of the people" refers to individual rights, broader than just militia context.

    • The phrases 'keep' and 'bear arms' encompass personal possession of weapons.