Mapp v. Ohio was a notable landmark supreme court case that focuses on the fourth amendment which is protection from unreasonable search and seizures being violated. In this case, Dollree Mapp’s fourth amendment right was violated. In a 5-3 majority of Mapp’s favor, I reject the dissenting opinion.
In Justice Harlan’s dissenting opinion, he argued that the majority had faced the wrong issue in their decision. He explains that since Mapp was in violation of possession of lewd and obscene material, the issue is dealing with the fourteenth amendment which is equal protection of the law and the majority ignored judicial restraint and stare decisis. Harlan believed the case was dealing with the first amendment and should not have lengthen to the fourth amendment; he came to the conclusion that imposing the exclusionary rule “bore quite different responsibilities in this area of law.” …show more content…
In Mapp v. Ohio, the fourth amendment that was violated states that “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.” There have been several court cases where the fourth amendment right was violated. For example, in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), the court stated
In Justice Harlan’s dissenting opinion, he argued that the majority had faced the wrong issue in their decision. He explains that since Mapp was in violation of possession of lewd and obscene material, the issue is dealing with the fourteenth amendment which is equal protection of the law and the majority ignored judicial restraint and stare decisis. Harlan believed the case was dealing with the first amendment and should not have lengthen to the fourth amendment; he came to the conclusion that imposing the exclusionary rule “bore quite different responsibilities in this area of law.” …show more content…
In Mapp v. Ohio, the fourth amendment that was violated states that “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.” There have been several court cases where the fourth amendment right was violated. For example, in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), the court stated