Question

1. In this new digital age, can we assume that we have fewer protections under the Fourth Amendment?

2. What is the motivation for the Founding Fathers' create of the Bill of Rights in the United States?

3. How could an investigation involving digital evidence be different in the European Union than in the United States?

4. Under what circumstances can a case move from a state court to a federal court?

5. Under what circumstances is a warrant not required by law enforcement to conduct a search?

6. Why is the USA PATRIOT Act so contentious with the American Public?

Answer 1

1)Answer:-yes it provide protetion ,To honor this freedom, the Fourth Amendment protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures by state or federal law enforcement authorities. The flip side is that the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are reasonable.In effect, the bill makes clear that electronic devices are part of the “persons, houses, papers, and effects” protected by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Living in the digital age requires affording electronic data the same protection as physical paper data.

2)Answer:-The nation's founders believed that containing the government's power and protecting liberty was their most important task, and declared a new purpose for government: the protection of individual rights. The protection of rights was not the government's only purpose.

3)Answer:-A European investigating judge must ask an official of his government to send an official request to the US government.

The FBI then reviews the evidence to ensure it does not contain confidential information unrelated to the original request.The data is then sent to the requesting government which passes it to the investigators.Western democracies are conspicuously absent from the sponsoring parties. [4] Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have issued a protest letter claiming the Russian initiative would potentially infringe upon human rights. "This doesn't work, the operations are totally blocked,"  The fact that both sides are stricter in significant respects is important to two distinct topics: how to reform the system of Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA), and whether the United States provides “adequate” protection for personal data under EU law, and thus is an appropriate destination for data flows from the EU. a frustrated European justice official said."We all know that virtually every serious threat we investigate today requires access to electronic evidence like the contents of emails, instant messages, photos, traffic data, session logs, subscriber information, and the like," Richard Downing, a top US Justice.

4)Answer:-As a general rule, a case that originates in a state court remains in state court for its entire duration, including appeals that arise out of the original trial verdict. There are some limited circumstances under which a state-court case can move to a federal court. Cases that are adjudicated in state trial courts are appealed to the state court of appeals, and then to the state supreme court. Cases that are adjudicated in state trial courts are never appealed to federal District Courts. This is not permitted.

5)Answer:-IUnder the Fourth Amendment, police officers must obtain written permission from a court of law to legally search a person and his or her property and seize evidence while they are investigating possible criminal activity. And, as in the Law and Order case above, the exclusionary rule mandates that evidence obtained through illegal searches is not admissible in a court of law. However, many individuals under the pressure of the police may not be aware of this rule or their other rights under the Fourth Amendment. In addition, there are cases in which police can legally search without a warrant if probable cause is established or if consent is given by an individual.

if the police see an illegal act occurring outside of your home, they may perform a search and seize evidence from your home without a search warrant. For example, if a police officer stops a driver for speeding and sees marijuana in the window, a search can be conducted without a warrant.

6)Answer:-The stated purpose of the Act is to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes.One criticism of the Act is that "other purposes" often includes the detection and prosecution of non-terrorist alleged future crimes.

***if the solution helped you please give a like..thanks in advance, if there is any doubt fee free to comment section i will try to solved your problem.