Supreme Court Rules on Searches

This week, the Supreme Court ruled that police cannot search a home, without a warrant, when one resident allows them entry but another refuses.   This is the first time the Supreme Court has ruled on the police’s authority to search a home under these circumstances.  Dissenting Supreme Court justices worry that this ruling may hamper investigations of domestic abuse.  Others, who supported the ruling, claim the ruling will not prevent police from investigating suspected cases of domestic abuse.  

This ruling was made in a Georgia case (Georgia v. Randolph) where a married couple was having marital difficulties.  The wife led the police to evidence that was later used to charge her husband with cocaine possession.  When the police arrived at the door, however, the husband, Scott Fitz Randolph, was at the door refusing to allow the police to enter their residence.  While Randolph was charged with cocaine possession, this charge was put on hold to determine the legality of the search.  

The Supreme Court ruled that the search of the Randolph home was unconstitutional.  Justice John Paul Stevens explaining in his written opinion: “Assuming that both spouses are competent, neither one is a master possessing the power to override the other’s constitutional right to deny entry to their castle.”