SCOTUS Strikes Down Biden-Backed Police Firearm Seizure Case

[middlefinger]

.

The Supreme Court’s ruling was unanimous

The Supreme Court has dealt the Biden administration a defeat on a “caretaking” case. The case tested whether or not police could enter private property without a warrant if an individual was believed to pose a threat to himself or others.

In the case Caniglia v. Strom, the Supreme Court ruled that “caretaking” did not justify entering a man’s home to remove firearms because he was believed to have expressed suicidal thoughts. The man was taken to a local mental health facility for psychiatric evaluation.

“Police entered the home under a ‘community caretaking’ exception that allows entry in cases where doing so benefits the public interest, which has traditionally applied to incidents regarding vehicles but not in homes,” Forbes reported.

“That exception had been favored by the law enforcement in the case and also the Biden administration, whose Justice Department said in an amicus brief that police should be able to enter homes without a warrant in cases that are ‘objectively grounded in a non-investigatory public interest, such as health or safety’,” Forbes’ report continued.

The Supreme Court ruled that such a purported ‘exception’ violates the Fourth Amendment law against unreasonable search and seizure.

“What is reasonable for vehicles is different from what is reasonable for homes,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his opinion. Thomas noted that the “community caretaking” exception did not constitute “a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home.”

https://trendingpolitics.com/breakin...urce=economics

[ExFlyinguy]

Nice to finally see a unanimous vote of sound mind

[Will3212]

Justice Thomas is the man.

[PAMedic=F|A=]

U.S. Supreme Court limits police power to enter homes with no warrant
Mon, May 17, 2021, 10:42 AM

FILE PHOTO: The United States Supreme Court Building's facade is seen in Washington, D.C.
By Andrew Chung

(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to make it easier for police to enter a home without a warrant for reasons of health or public safety, throwing out a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a Rhode Island man after officers entered his home and confiscated his guns.

The 9-0 ruling directed the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider Edward Caniglia's lawsuit accusing police of violating his constitutional rights by bringing him to a hospital for a mental health evaluation and taking away his guns without a warrant after a 2015 argument with his wife.

Lower courts had ruled that police in the Rhode Island city of Cranston did not violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.

The case centered on a legal doctrine that gives officers leeway to engage in "community caretaking" to ensure public safety. In its ruling, the Supreme Court, which has previously applied this doctrine to vehicles, said it does not apply to the home as well.

"What is reasonable for vehicles is different from what is reasonable for homes," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court.

In ruling against Caniglia, the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that even if his case did not involve an emergency, the police conduct was justified under the community caretaking doctrine.

There has been heightened concern over police conduct, including how authorities deal with mentally ill people, in the wake of protests in many cities last year against racism and police brutality.

President Joe Biden's administration backed police in the case. A Justice Department lawyer told the justices that officers should not be required to obtain warrants in situations in which people could be seriously harmed.

The Rhode Island case arose from a domestic dispute. An argument between Caniglia and his wife Kim that began over a Walt Disney World coffee mug escalated into a disagreement about her extended family, according to court papers. At one point, Caniglia retrieved a gun and asked his wife to shoot him to "get me out of my misery," according to court papers.

She decided to spend the night at a hotel, then called police because she feared her husband could be suicidal.

Caniglia, 70, said in court papers he had no criminal history and no record of violence or misuse of guns. Police returned his guns only after he sued.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme...144209326.html

[Domer Dad]

So is it overly simplistic to suggest this puts an end to red flag legislations?

Or is there enough nuance here to not be that helpful?

[raxar]

That sound you hear is police departments and local governments all over the country not giving a shit what the supreme court says.

[internet troll]

That’s one they got right so far this year. Could be an interesting month.

[Carson]

Justice Department said in an amicus brief that police should be able to enter homes without a warrant in cases that are *objectively grounded in a non-investigatory public interest, such as health or safety*,* Forbes* report continued.

Good ruling. The SCOTUS could see where the above would be going in the future.

[DavidH]

This is HUGE! Biden admin was trying to get closer to full on Communism with this. If they can just say someone is a threat, they could take firearms. That*s what they wanted. Good job Supreme Court. I*m surprised the DEMONcrats voted constitutionally on this, and nit according to *Their Truth*!

[Delkal]

I am still shaking my head in disbelief! 9-0 for a firearms related law? My opinion of the supreme court went up ever so slightly.