Justice Stephen Breyer, borrowing a phrase, on Wednesday called the Fourth Amendment case a “cruel trilemma.” Justice Neil Gorsuch said he saw some inconsistency with the amendment’s original meaning. Justice Samuel Alito Jr., looking at a video that was part of the evidence, questioned whether there was even a “hot pursuit,” central to the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday found no easy answers to whether the “hot pursuit” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, which allows police to enter a home when they have probable cause to believe someone committed a felony, should be extended to misdemeanor pursuits.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]