U.S. Supreme Court to rule on warrantless gun grab
Biden admin claims it was reasonable for officers to take firearms from innocent man
The U.S. Supreme Court will rule soon on whether police are allowed to enter a man’s home without a warrant and take his guns.
That will be after they hear the Biden administration argue that such a scenario is reasonable.
The court heard arguments Wednesday in a case involving a Rhode Island couple. The couple got in an argument that spiraled out of control when the husband, Edward Daniglia, gave his wife, Kim, an unloaded gun and told her to put him out of his misery.
She left the house but later called police to check on him.
The Washington Examiner reported the case “comes amid increasing friction between police and many of the communities they are tasked with protecting.”
Also, several prominent Democrats have openly advocated, sometimes in jest, sometimes not, sending police to Americans’ homes to confiscate weapons they consider unacceptable.
In the Rhode Island case, when police arrived, they found Caniglia was calm, but hauled him to a hospital for a mental health evaluation anyway. They then searched his home and took his guns.
He alleged police violated his Fourth Amendment rights but lost at district and appellate courts.
The Examiner reported several justices focused on the legal provision police have for “community care.” Typically that gives them the ability to search vehicles for anything that could be a danger to a community. It hasn’t commonly been applied to homes.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh cited the need for officers to be able to check on seniors who might have fallen.
The Biden administration urged the justices to agree with police.
“The ultimate question in this case is therefore not whether the respondent officers’ actions fit within some narrow warrant exception, but instead whether those actions were reasonable.”
The Rutherford Institute said case could set a dangerous precedent because police entered a citizen’s home without a warrant and took legal firearms.
It filed a friend-of-the-court brief contending the “community caretaking” exemption in the Fourth Amendment was wrongly used.
“This case represents a blatant attempt by law enforcement to create gaping holes in the Fourth Amendment force field that is supposed to protect homeowners and their homes against warrantless invasions by the government,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute.
“What we do not need is yet another slippery slope argument that allows government officials to masquerade as community caretakers under the pretext of public health and safety in order to violate the Fourth Amendment at will.”