Although made without a search warrant, a search incidental to a lawful administrative arrest does not violate the fourth amendment. 'Abel', 1960

[excalibur]

This was a Supreme Court decision.

This is among the legal authorities ICE is using.


Abel v. United States, 1960



Abstract

As a preliminary to deportation proceedings, defendant, Rudolf I. Abel, was arrested in his hotel room by Immigration and Naturalization Service agents who acted pursuant to a valid administrative arrest warrant. After the arrest, but without a search warrant, the INS searched Abel's room and seized evidence later used in his trial for espionage. In the district court Abel moved to suppress this evidence on the theory that the search violated the fourth amendment. The district court's denial of the motion was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, held, affirmed, four Justices dissenting. Although made without a search warrant, a search incidental to a lawful administrative arrest does not violate the fourth amendment. Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217 (1960).

https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol59/iss2/9/

 

[TNHarley]

Although made without a search warrant, a search incidental to a lawful administrative arrest does not violate the fourth amendment

Just more shit they made up. The constitution does not say that.
The SC is good about making shit up.

 

[Godboy]

Just more shit they made up. The constitution does not say that.
The SC is good about making shit up.

You made that up.

 

[TNHarley]

You made that up.

Here is the 4th amendment dumbass
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Now show me where it says: Although made without a search warrant, a search incidental to a lawful administrative arrest does not violate the fourth amendment.

 

[Doc7505]

Just more shit they made up. The constitution does not say that.
The SC is good about making shit up.

So that means that the arrest of Rudolph Abel that led to the exposure of a Russia spy was illegal and should not have happened and the trade of Abel for Gary Powers should never have happened according to you.
Typical Marxist Commie ideology and reasoning...

 

[TNHarley]

So that means that the arrest of Rudolph Abel that led to the exposure of a Russia spy was illegal and should not have happened and the trade of Abel for Gary Powers should never have happened according to you.

Doc, I just posted the fourth amendment. Lets not revel in emotion, ok? Lets deal with the facts.

 

[Godboy]

Here is the 4th amendment dumbass
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Now show me where it says: Although made without a search warrant, a search incidental to a lawful administrative arrest does not violate the fourth amendment.

They are deporting the ******* guy. Its not unreasonable to go back to the room and secure his stuff. He doesnt own that room. He doesnt live there. The hotel cant just close the room down until the guy comes back, which he never will. Furthermore, he isnt a citizen, so **** him. He doesnt get OUR rights.

 

[TNHarley]

They are deporting the ******* guy. Its not unreasonable to go back to the room and secure his stuff. He doesnt own that room. He doesnt live there. The hotel cant just close the room down until the guy comes back, which he never will. Furthermore, he isnt a citizen, so **** him. He doesnt get OUR rights.

Where was my made up shit, you ******* idiot? Dont deflect, back your crap up.

 

[Cassandro]

Where was my made up shit, you ******* idiot? Dont deflect, back your crap up.

YOU are the one who posted about making shit up:

Just more shit they made up. The constitution does not say that.
The SC is good about making shit up.

Don't you even read your own posts?

 

[TNHarley]

YOU are the one who posted about making shit up:

Don't you even read your own posts?

He said I was the one making shit up, you big dummy.