Indianna Supreme Court: No right to resist unlawful police entry

[phantom power]

INDIANAPOLIS—People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law.

The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers who enter their homes without any right would increase the risk of violent confrontation. If police enter a home illegally, the courts are the proper place to protest it, Justice Steven David said.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

Justices Robert Rucker and Brent Dickson strongly dissented, saying the ruling runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure, The Times of Munster reported.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-in-police-unlawfulen,0,6950521.story

[demosincebirth]

1. I sadly agree

[BlueCollar]

2. "modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence"

The key word here to me is "modern" which I take to mean "in these days and circumstances" as opposed to "what the founding fathers intended"

which gives rise to the whole "activist judges" discussion.

This should be interesting if it ever gets traction.

:popcorn:

[I owe]

3. Ax'l Rose was right

[onethatcares]

4. is this a "living" constitution these guys are going by?

I'm flabbergasted by this ruling.

[spin]

5. So all the criminal home invaders need is police uniforms . (n/t)