read the book We The PeopleThomas E. Patterson 15th edition After reading the chapter, return to the section entitled "Politics in Action" on pgs. 106-107. Do you agree with the Court's reasoning in this case? Is a suspect's cell phone fundamentally different from other physical items, such as drugs, that are found on a suspect? Can you think of a situation in which police could lawfully search a suspect's cell phone without first getting a warrant?

STUDY Case Study: Politics in Action Riley v. California (2014) The Fourth Amendment says "The right of the people to be secure in their person homes, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall no be violated." However, the Constitution does not distinguish between "unreasonable" search and seizure, which is prohibited, and "reasonable" search and seizure, which is permitted. Morakot Kawinchan/Shutterstock Page 107 The Supreme Court addressed that issue in a key 2014 case, Riley v.