Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Crime and Consequences

Criminal Law

: Crime and Consequences

Arizona v. Gant: A Bright-Line Too Far?

By Kent Scheidegger et al.

Unlike the Herring case, noted here, the issue in Arizona v. Gant, also argued yesterday, is purely on the substantive scope of the Fourth Amendment. The tone of the argument is quite different. In particular, Justice Scalia comes across quite differently in this argument. The Fourth Amendment protects against "unreasonable searches." The word "unreasonable" is unavoidably vague and necessarily requires the courts to make value judgments. However, judging after the fact whether someone's actions met a vaguely defined standard can be unfair to the person being judged, and it provides inadequate protection against future violations. A person cannot be deterred from crossing a line if does not know where the line is. So, as Justice Souter wrote for the Court in Atwater v...continue to full post

Full post as published by Crime and Consequences on October 08, 2008 (boomark / email).