Court Opinion

ID: 9883117
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 01:37:22.582582+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:21.424859
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Blackmun,
dissenting.
I, too, dissent. I do so largely for the reasons expressed in Chief Judge Lumbard’s thoughtful and scholarly opinion for the Court of Appeals. But I also feel that the judicial legislation, which the Court by its opinion today concededly is effectuating, opens the door for another avalanche of new federal cases. Whenever a suspect imagines, or chooses to assert, that a Fourth Amendment right has been violated, he will now immediately sue the federal officer in federal court. This will tend to stultify proper law enforcement and to make the day’s labor for the honest and conscientious officer- even more onerous and more critical. Why the Court moves in this direction at this time of our history, I do not know. The Fourth Amendment was adopted in 1791, and in all the intervening years neither the Congress nor the Court has seen fit to take this step. I had thought that for the truly aggrieved person other quite adequate remedies have always been available. If not, ¿t is the Congress and not this Court that should act.