On the recordFebruary 7, 1995
we all want to see criminals convicted and serve prison sentences for their crimes. No one wants to hinder the police in their dangerous and difficult effort to protect all of us and to combat crime. However, this bill is not about merely eliminating legal technicalities. It is about removing the requirement for a warrant prior to a search and seizure, and the Founders of our country believed that our citizens should be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The words of the Constitution, the fourth amendment, ``The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, and papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated.'' I am not talking about the rights of defendants or the rights of prosecutors. We are talking about a fundamental right of the people of this country, and that is what we want to protect here today. I do not think we should chip away at that fundamental right. The warrant requirement is not a burden on law enforcement. Police can get a warrant by telephone. In fact, it takes sometimes only 2 minutes to get a warrant. Warrantless searches are permissible under exigent circumstances. I do agree that officers who rely on a warrant that later turns out to be invalid should not be penalized. I support that part of the bill that codifies that good-faith exception. I also support extending this exception to cases where the police relied upon a statute that later turned out to be unconstitutional.
Source
govinfo.gov




