A judge when the request for a search warrant is presented, or a peace officer when articulable probable cause or reasonable suspicion exists.
The order of the words in the fourth amendment is interesting. Probable cause applies to getting a warrant for search, but is separated from the first part of the paragraph. So, excluding the standard for a warrant, who defines unreasonable?
I feel the sudden urge to take a constitutional law class. I find this subject fascinating.
A peace offer trained in ascertaining reasonable suspicion or probable cause,or even a civilian when such probable cause exists that a felony has been committed or is imminent as could be articulated by a "reasonable person".
Note: Random searches do not fall under any of these catagories.
I feel the sudden urge to take a constitutional law class. I find this subject fascinating.
It will only be useful if their is a constitution left that anybody bothers to consult, which doesn't appear to be the case.
I can relate. I find reading supreme court opinions (and the occasional appelate decision to be extremely enlightening. (Google: cornell, supreme court). I read most of them, and have found it to be interesting to thread my way back through opinions cited by the court. Seeing how the precidents evolve over time (almost always to the detriment of our personal liberty) has been eye-opening. Much of the time it is depressing, but occasionally you'll find some real gems. I absolutely love reading Scalia and Thomas. They are especially good reading when dissenting.
If I could have absolute power for 24 hours, I'd scrap every bit of jurisprudence except certain aspects of the "incorporation" doctrine from the last century and return the US Code to what it was in 1910, with a few allowances made for subsequent technological advances. Two great side benefits to this would immediately accrue to us.