NCJ Number
179207
Date Published
1998
Length
43 pages
Annotation
Because the exclusionary rule is the only effective tool the judiciary has for preserving the integrity of its warrant-issuing authority, any legislative attempt to abrogate the rule should be declared null and void by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Abstract
The U.S. Constitution called for three separate branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. The separation-of-powers principle requires each branch to respect the constitutional responsibilities that have been assigned to the other branches. In America, the power to search is divided between the executive and judicial branches. This means executive agents must obtain search warrants from judicial officers before they invade the homes or businesses of citizens. When executive agents bypass the warrant application procedure or disregard the terms and conditions of search warrants, they are engaged in unlawful behavior. The judiciary can respond to executive law violations by barring the admission of illegally seized evidence in criminal trials. The purpose of the exclusionary rule is to compel respect for the judiciary's warrant-issuing prerogative. By removing the incentive to disregard the warrant clause and the judicial role in searches and seizures, the rule seeks to restore the equilibrium that the Fourth Amendment established. Congress, the legislative branch of the Federal Government, has tried to transfer power from the judicial branch to the executive branch by abrogating the exclusionary rule. In so doing, Congress is essentially trying to alter the constitutional equilibrium with mere legislation. 88 notes