Caniglia v. Strom - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

On March 24, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral arguement in Caniglia v. Strom. The question before the court was whether the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement extends to the home.
Robert Frommer, Senior Attorney at the Institute for Justice, joins us today to discuss this case's oral argument.

Full of inaccuracies and a half baked analysis

Factually, this was not a complicated case. Yet it's surprising how most of the facts are glossed over, especially towards the beginning. I've heard first day 1L's give a better factual summary. It's almost as if the narrator decided instead of reading any of the briefs or listening to any of the arguments, to just skim the cliff notes. And by cliff notes I mean the back of a Denny's kids menu that was drawn on with crayon. Most evident of the poor attention to this case is the fact that the narrator continues to refer to the respondent as "the State", despite the fact that this was a case involving a municipality (the City of Cranston), not a state. It makes a huge difference (legally speaking). Just Google the case, it's not that hard to figure out who the parties are. In fact, the State of RI wasn't even involved in this case! It just shows the lack of thought and attention that went into this analysis. Imagine having to give a book report on President Abraham Lincoln, but instead you just decided to skim the table of contents and wrote the entire paper on how the entire city of Lincoln, Nebraska won the Civil War (and killed all those vampires). Fedsoc should be really disappointed.