Probable Cause and Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests or Rigid Rules?

11 Pages Posted: 16 Jul 2014 Last revised: 11 Oct 2014

See all articles by Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

Penn State Law (University Park)

Date Written: July 1, 2014

Abstract

This piece argues that the Supreme Court's April 2014 decision in Navarette v. Calfornia, like last Term's opinion in Florida v. Harris, deviates from longstanding Supreme Court precedent treating probable cause and reasonable suspicion as totality-of-the-circumstances tests. Instead, these two recent rulings essentially rely on rigid rules to define probable cause and reasonable suspicion. The article criticizes the Court for selectively endorsing bright-line tests that favor the prosecution, and argues that both decisions generate rules that oversimplify and therefore tend to be overinclusive.

Keywords: Fourth Amendment

Suggested Citation

Kinports, Kit, Probable Cause and Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests or Rigid Rules? (July 1, 2014). 163 University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online 75 (2014), Penn State Law Research Paper No. 32-2014, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2466073

Kit Kinports (Contact Author)

Penn State Law (University Park) ( email )

Lewis Katz Building
University Park, PA 16802
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
110
Abstract Views
1,008
rank
276,344
PlumX Metrics