Rethinking the Reasoning of Verdugo-Urquidez

41 Pages Posted: 1 Jan 2020

See all articles by Alan Mygatt-Tauber

Alan Mygatt-Tauber

United States Department of the Navy

Date Written: December 11, 2019

Abstract

This article critiques the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez. It argues that after nearly 30 years, the “substantial connections” test, which determines if an alien may claim the protections of the Fourth Amendment, has proven entirely unworkable and has been misapplied to areas of law it was never intended to go. It suggests two potential solutions: 1) it offers some much-needed guideposts for courts to use when applying the test; and 2) it offers an alternative that courts should adopt, holding that the Fourth Amendment travels with federal agents enforcing criminal law.

Keywords: extraterritorial, extraterritoriality, Constitution, Fourth Amendment, Law, constitutional law, Verdugo-Urquidez, warrant, search, substantial connections

Suggested Citation

Mygatt-Tauber, Alan, Rethinking the Reasoning of Verdugo-Urquidez (December 11, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3502411 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3502411

Alan Mygatt-Tauber (Contact Author)

United States Department of the Navy ( email )

United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
33
Abstract Views
326
PlumX Metrics