Bill+of+Rights+horsma19

=The 4th Amendment= //" Write the text of the amendment here" (Consider styling the text in a way that makes it stand out, but not too crazy so that it's distracting.)// The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 

Description
In your own words, explain what the amendment means. The 4th amendment means that Americans can't have their personal property searched without a warrant.

Historical Applications
How has this amendment been challenged, defined, applied, or maybe even ignored? Do some research to see if the Supreme Court has made any decisions affecting the amendment you are studying. How have those decisions made a difference in how it is applied today? This amendment has been shown in 1968, when a police officer saw three men pacing in front of a jewelry store. The officer thought that the men were making a plan to rob the store so he then approached them and performed frisks on the defendants and found illegal, concealed weapons on both Chilton and Terry. They were convicted and appealed, claiming that this was a violation to their 4th amendment rights. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction ,  finding that when a law enforcement officer has "reasonable grounds" for suspecting that a criminal suspect may be armed, he may pat down the outer layer of the suspect's clothing for weapons.

Today's Application
In what ways is this amendment still applied for today's society? How is this being redefined for our generation? Do some research to see if there are any organizations that are promoting an aspect of this amendment and share what they say here. On the Fourth Amendment and New Technologies, by Paul Larkin, he said; "The amendment prohibits the government from conducting unreasonable “searches” and “seizures.” The exclusionary rule enforces the amendment by prohibiting federal, state, or local judges from admitting in the government’s case-in-chief evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. [|[3]] Parties injured by an unlawful search or seizure can also bring a damages action against the officers involved, but the exclusionary rule has made criminal trials the most likely forum for a public airing of competing versions of what the Fourth Amendment should protect. Yet, even though the Fourth Amendment has been a fundamental part of American jurisprudence for nearly 225 years—and the exclusionary rule a constitutionally required remedy for nearly a century [|[4]] —the question of whether reliance on sensory-enhancing technology can render a search or seizure unreasonable is a relatively new one. No one seems to have challenged a sheriff’s use of spectacles or torches to improve his day or night vision, [|[5]] although it is certain that one or more constables or local residents called out as part of a “hue and cry”."

Media: Not a separate section!!!
This is not to be a separate section, but I want to make sure you don't leave these things out. As you're researching and building this page, be sure to add relevant media here: pictures, videos, and links to other pages make your work relevant and meaningful. **In the end, delete this entire section.**
 * politicaloutcast.com[[image:dp_privacy_500.gif width="251" height="174"]]**


 * http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/09/the-fourth-amendment-and-new-technologies**