Forum Boss
Administrator
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in no uncertain terms, that Americans still have Constitutional Rights protecting them against warrantless searches, and related seizure of firearms.
www.thetruthaboutguns.com
The Supreme Court has unanimously struck down warrantless so-called “community caretaking” searches of homes for firearms in a decision handed down today. In Caniglia v. Strom, Rhode Island police responded to a wellness check request by a man’s wife and confiscated his firearms.
Court decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-157_8mjp.pdf
The police hung the legality of their warrant-free search on the “community caretaking” exception that allows them to search a vehicle that they’ve impounded. But that exception has never been extended to homes. The plaintiff had to sue the police department to get his guns back.
Today, however, the Supreme Court signaled — in no uncertain terms — that they aren’t interested in poking a huge hole in the Fourth Amendment.
From Forbes . . .
The court ruled that the exception could not be extended to the home without violating the Fourth Amendment, overturning two lower courts that sided with the police officers and their argument that the amendment “does not prohibit law enforcement officers from diffusing a volatile situation in a home to protect the residents or others.”
“What is reasonable for vehicles is different from what is reasonable for homes,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his opinion for the court, noting that the previous standard that allowed the “community caretaking” exception was not “a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home.”
The court’s decision does not affect police officers’ ability to take “reasonable steps to assist those who are inside a home and in need of aid” that are protected under a separate “exigent circumstances” doctrine, Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted in a concurring opinion, such as when an elderly person has fallen or to prevent a potential suicide.
It’s more than a little instructive that the BidenHarris administration came down squarely on the side of giving police more power to search individuals’ homes without a warrant. As Gun Owners of America’s John Velleco wrote here regarding the implications of the case, if the Court’s decision had gone the other way . . . "It would mean yet another erosion of the ancient English notion that “a man’s home is his castle” which undergirded the Fourth Amendment. It would allow police to conduct warrantless searches of your home and seizures of your firearms on the flimsiest of excuses."

Supreme Court Unanimously Strikes Down Warrantless 'Caretaking' Firearm Searches - The Truth About Guns
The Supreme Court has unanimously struck down warrantless so-called “community caretaking” searches of homes for firearms in a decision handed down today. In the search prompting Caniglia v. Strom, Rhode Island police responded to a wellness check request by a man’s wife and confiscated his...

The Supreme Court has unanimously struck down warrantless so-called “community caretaking” searches of homes for firearms in a decision handed down today. In Caniglia v. Strom, Rhode Island police responded to a wellness check request by a man’s wife and confiscated his firearms.
Court decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-157_8mjp.pdf
The police hung the legality of their warrant-free search on the “community caretaking” exception that allows them to search a vehicle that they’ve impounded. But that exception has never been extended to homes. The plaintiff had to sue the police department to get his guns back.
Today, however, the Supreme Court signaled — in no uncertain terms — that they aren’t interested in poking a huge hole in the Fourth Amendment.
From Forbes . . .
The court ruled that the exception could not be extended to the home without violating the Fourth Amendment, overturning two lower courts that sided with the police officers and their argument that the amendment “does not prohibit law enforcement officers from diffusing a volatile situation in a home to protect the residents or others.”
“What is reasonable for vehicles is different from what is reasonable for homes,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his opinion for the court, noting that the previous standard that allowed the “community caretaking” exception was not “a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home.”
The court’s decision does not affect police officers’ ability to take “reasonable steps to assist those who are inside a home and in need of aid” that are protected under a separate “exigent circumstances” doctrine, Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted in a concurring opinion, such as when an elderly person has fallen or to prevent a potential suicide.
It’s more than a little instructive that the BidenHarris administration came down squarely on the side of giving police more power to search individuals’ homes without a warrant. As Gun Owners of America’s John Velleco wrote here regarding the implications of the case, if the Court’s decision had gone the other way . . . "It would mean yet another erosion of the ancient English notion that “a man’s home is his castle” which undergirded the Fourth Amendment. It would allow police to conduct warrantless searches of your home and seizures of your firearms on the flimsiest of excuses."