The 4th Amendment has been described by Conservative HQ as “one of the most important arrows in the quiver against bullying big government.” Because the government doesn’t just search and seize paper–it also goes after your cell phones, your Facebook account, your email (even when stored on Google’s server), your tweets, your DNA (by definition, your family’s DNA) etc.–we want a sturdy Fourth Amendment, right? Justice Scalia thinks so. He’s been called the 4th Amendment’s “premier defender.” Unfortunately, it seems that SCOW disagrees, and not just now when conservatives hold a majority on the court. Voting patterns over the past 19 years suggest that 4th Amendment challenges might go down in yearbooks as “the least likely to succeed” in SCOW. See the data for yourselves on today’s edition of SCOWstats, which shows how the 4th Amendment has fared term-by-term and justice-by-justice.
In case you’re wondering, challenges under Article 1, §11 of the Wisconsin Constitution receive no greater affection.
What do YOU think about the 4th Amendment’s status as persona non grata in SCOW? Feel free to submit a “comment” below.
