Shawn E. Fields

Print
Article
Volume 90.4
The Fourth Amendment Without Police
Shawn E. Fields
Assistant Professor of Law, Campbell University School of Law.

I am grateful for conversations and discussion at the 2021 Southeastern Association of Law Schools Conference, at which I received helpful input from Cynthia Alkon, Mitch Crusto, Raff Donelson, Jancy Hoeffel, Nicole Iannarone, Christopher Lund, Carla Reyes, Daniel Schaffa, Kate Sneddon, Neil Sobol, Scott Sundby, Anna VanCleave, and Howard Wasserman. I also received enormously helpful comments and feedback from Dwight Aarons, Kristen Bell, Zac Bolitho, Bobbi Jo Boyd, Marcus Gadson, Tony Ghiotto, Noël Harlow, Orin Kerr, Cortney Lollar, and Gustavo Ribeiro. All errors are my own.

What role will the Fourth Amendment play in a world without police? As academics, activists, and lawmakers explore alternatives to traditional law enforcement, it bears asking whether the amendment primarily tasked with regulating police investigations would also regulate postpolice public safety agencies. Surprisingly, the answer is often no. Courts are reluctant to recognize protections from government searches or seizures outside criminal investigations, and they are even more reluctant to require probable cause or a warrant for such conduct. Thus, by removing most public safety functions outside the criminal sphere, abolitionists also move intrusive government conduct outside these traditional strictures and guardrails. This Article provides the first sustained evaluation of the Fourth Amendment’s limited role in a postpolice world and examines the implications of this reality.