"The view that the Fourth Amendment does not apply to domestic military operations against terrorists makes eminent sense. Consider, for example, a case in which a military commander, authorized to use force domestically, received information that, although credible, did not amount to probable cause, that a terrorist group had concealed a weapon of mass destruction in an apartment building. In order to prevent a disaster in which hundreds or thousands of lives would be lost,"
"the commander should be able to immediately seize and secure the entire building, evacuate and search the premises, and detain, search, and interrogate everyone found inside. If done by the police for ordinary law enforcement purposes, such actions most likely would be held to violate the Fourth Amendment."
A legal position holds that the Fourth Amendment does not apply to domestic military operations against terrorists. A hypothetical describes credible but non-probable-cause information that a terrorist group concealed a weapon of mass destruction in an apartment building. Immediate military measures — seizure, evacuation, search, detention, and interrogation of all occupants — are presented as necessary to prevent mass casualties. Civilian warrant and probable-cause requirements are said to make such military operations impossible. Ybarra v. Illinois is cited to show that police searches of all persons on compact premises would violate the Fourth Amendment, justifying a distinct military standard.
Read at emptywheel
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]