Arguments Against Exclusionary Rule

The exclusionary rule is a judge-made rule, adopted by the courts to stop the police from conducting illegal searches and seizures. The constitution merely says the people shall be free from unreasonable searches. It doesn't say what the courts should do once an unreasonable search and seizure has taken place. The courts finally decided on the exclusionary rule, the rule that says that evidence illegally seized may not be used as evidence, as a means of enforcement. "We're sorry" doesn't quite cut it. The courts gave as their rationale for the rule the concept of "unclean hands." If the courts, the symbol of our highest justice, use evidence they know to be illegally obtained, they condone through their use of the evidence the illegal action …show more content…
It has been debated since its inception and throughout its development whether the courts had the right to "create" this remedy, whether it really serves the intended purpose of protecting our constitutional right to privacy, and whether it has any actual deterrence effect with the police. As crime rates and organized crime have been on the upswing, the efficacy and legitimacy of the rule continues to be called into question. In recent years it has been eroded by such policies as the "good faith" exception, which says that even if a warrant is invalid, more than six months old, if the police believe it in "good faith" to be valid, the exclusionary rule will not …show more content…
"To enforce the Fourth Amendment we rely on the exclusionary rule, first adopted by the Supreme court in 1914 in Weeks v. United States, and applied to the states in 1961 in Mapp v. Ohio. " Peltason, Understanding the Constitution, p.149. The exclusionary rule does not apply to violations by purely private individuals, as established by Burdeau v. McDowell (1921) 256 U.S.465, 41 S.Ct. 574, 65 L.Ed. 1048 and followed ever since. However the ruling does apply to private citizens acting under color of law, as established in United States v. Price (1965) 383 U.S. 787, 86 S.Ct. 1152, 16 L.Ed.2d 267. [California interpretation of Price: Stapleton v. Superior Court, (1968) 70 Cal.2d 97, 101, 73 Cal.Rptr. 575, 447 P.2d 967.] (California State University, Dominguez

Show More