[5777] in Central_America
Re: New quotes for Tue Feb 7
srz@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (srz@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sat Feb 11 00:35:19 1995
McCollum (Repulican):
I think it guts it for the simple reason it strikes out three-quarters
of the bill. It takes out the good faith exception that we tried to
put in the bill. It is as simple as that.
...
So that is why I am opposed to the amendment, and I certainly
understand there are Members on the other side that think somehow this
whole exclusionary rule debate is going to violate the fourth
amendment and do away with it. It does no such thing.
The particular provisions we are proposing today have been in
existence for quite a number of years in two Federal circuits, and
I have never heard anybody come forward and complain that there has
been some unreasonable search and seizure, the police have been
abusing this in those jurisdictions. That covers quite a number of
States, 14 or 15 States.
------------------------------
I don't think that responses like this show that Republicans think
that the Fourth Amendment should not exist... the whole question is
the subset of cases where police officers perform a good-faith search.
The legitimate debate is whether this is a large loophole that
allows the police to get around the 4th amendment. A lot of that depends on
particular cases and how courts enforce the provisions.
