Mapp V Ohio

A concise and compelling account of the closely-decided Supreme Court ruling that balanced the duties of state and local crime fighters against the rights of individuals from being tried with illegally seized evidence.

After three police officers burst into the home of Dolly Mapp, Mapp asked to see a search warrant, and was shown a piece of paper, but was given no details about the investigation. Mapp's case would affect every police search and seizure in the United States for years to come as it strengthened the rights of citizens against illegal and arbitrary searches.

The application of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule has divided the justices of the Supreme Court for nearly a century. This book traces the rise and fall of the exclusionary rule with insight and behind-the-scenes access into the Court's thinking.

This book explains the different approaches to interpreting the Fourth Amendment that the Supreme Court has used throughout American history, concentrating on the changes in interpretation since the Court applied the exclusionary rule to the states in 1961. It examines the evolution of the warrant rule and the exceptions to it, the reasonableness approach, the special needs approach, individual and society expectations of privacy, and the role of the exclusionary rule.

This book analyzes the theoretical nuances and practical implications of how judges use precedent.

"This boxed set contains classroom resources to help America's educators teach about the most important documents in U.S. history"--Box

When we think of constitutional law, we invariably think of the United States Supreme Court and the federal court system. Yet much of our constitutional law is not made at the federal level. In 51 Imperfect Solutions, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton argues that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in protecting individual liberties. The book tells four stories that arise in four different areas of constitutional law: equal protection; criminal procedure; privacy; and free speech and free exercise of religion. Traditional accounts of these bedrock debates about the relationship of the individual to the state focus on decisions of the United States Supreme Court. But these explanations tell just part of the story. The book corrects this omission by looking at each issue-and some others as well-through the lens of many constitutions, not one constitution; of many courts, not one court; and of all American judges, not federal or state judges. Taken together, the stories reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has all of the answers to the most vexing constitutional questions. If there is a central conviction of the book, it's that an underappreciation of state constitutional law has hurt state and federal law and has undermined the appropriate balance between state and federal courts in protecting individual liberty. In trying to correct this imbalance, the book also offers several ideas for reform.

Reviews and discusses landmark cases heard by the United States Supreme court from 1803 through 2000.