Lawyers Weigh In On The "Inevitable Warrant" Doctrine

Posted On March 24, 2014 by Daniel Koewler

We've already pointed out the Constitutional Crisis that is brewing in Minnesota. But what are other lawyers saying about the recently minted "Inevitable Warrant" doctrine?

Carol Weissenborn is a well-respected public defender and law professor, and she occasionally blogs about recent judicial decisions over at the Minnesota Supreme Court Criminal Blog. We've featured her insights in the past, and are going to do it again here today.

Ms. Weissenborn's blog post discusses what we call the "inevitable warrant" doctrine and what she calls the "hypothetical warrant rule." However you name it, it is an understatement to call this new doctrine troubling - but rather than put words in Ms. Weissenborn's mouth, we'll just provide a link to her insightful blog post and let our readers decide.

In the post, you can see Ms. Weissenborn's teaching background come to the forefront, as she carefully explains to the reader the true ramifications of what Minnesota's appellate courts are doing in the wake of Missouri v. McNeely.

The Fourth Amendment is over 200 years old, and has guided our free nation through World Wars, the rise of facist and totalitarian police states, incredible amounts of civil unrest, one full-on civil war, and a variety of different "wars" on crimes. Legislatures have tried to undermine the Fourth Amendment over and over since it was first ratified, and have had surprisingly little success. It will take a well educated and freedom loving population to withstand the most recent onslaught - so if you care at all about civil liberties, please read Ms. Weissenborn's blog and give this topic some serious consideration.We are - and not just because it's our job.