Fourth Amendment¶
Congressional Research Service. Fourth Amendment: Particularity Requirement" (Amdt4.5.4). Constitution Annotated.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Principle of Least Privilege
- In constitutional law, it appears as enumerated powers, agency-specific statutory jurisdiction, and warrants scoped to specific items or locations.
This sourceEstablishes that warrants must particularly describe the place to be searched and items to be seized, scoping the grant of search authority to specific items and locations and barring general searches.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Supports only the warrants element of the claim: the Fourth Amendment particularity rule confines a warrant to a described place and to specified items, and says nothing about enumerated powers or agency statutory jurisdiction.
“The requirement that warrants shall particularly describe the things to be seized makes general searches under them impossible and prevents the seizure of one thing under a warrant describing another.”
- In constitutional law, it appears as enumerated powers, agency-specific statutory jurisdiction, and warrants scoped to specific items or locations.
- Refractory Period
- In law, double-jeopardy bars and post-filing blackout periods are intrinsic windows barring the same kind of action after a defined event.
This sourceDocuments the double-jeopardy bar: once jeopardy attaches and a prosecution concludes, the same offense cannot be re-tried — an intrinsic post-event window barring the same action.
- In law, double-jeopardy bars and post-filing blackout periods are intrinsic windows barring the same kind of action after a defined event.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 2 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:ee4196339ac4 · see in the full table