The supreme court and the fourth amendment: When a conservative court's decisions are viewed as being a lapdog for law enforcement and rubber stamping virtually any and all law enforcement practices

This paper is a rejoinder to Craig Hemmens’ article “The Supreme Court: Lapdog of Law Enforcement Or Principled Expounder of Constitutional Protections?” Professor Hemmens claims that the “Supreme Court's discussion of the protections embodied in the Fourth Amendment is little more than a smoke screen for its true agenda: to justify virtually any and all law enforcement practices regardless of the cost to individual liberties.” It is my contention that whether one views the Supreme Court decisions individually or collectively, they do not support Professor Hemmens’ position. There are so many cases in which the Supreme Court has ruled against law enforcement interests and supported privacy interests that one cannot reasonably conclude that the Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment agenda is to support virtually any and all law enforcement practices regardless of the costs to individual liberties.