The document discusses arguments for and against eliminating the exclusionary rule. It summarizes comments from a police chief who said the rule makes police more professional by enforcing standards of behavior. It also summarizes comments from Representative Nancy Pelosi who said the rule protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by creating an incentive for police to know legal search and seizure standards. The document concludes by stating that without the exclusionary rule, warrants and the 4th Amendment would have no purpose and police would conduct unlawful searches.

1. Against or For the Exclusionary
Rule
By: Senator Morgen Caution

3. Argument #1
• The Head of the Narcotics Section of the
Organized Crime Division of the Chicago Police
Department stated in 1986, "I would not do
anything to the exclusionary rule . . . It makes
the police department more professional. It
enforces appropriate standards of
behavior." Source: American Civil Liberties
Union

4. Explanation
• I think a lot of police officers and government
officials forget that there are standards of
behavior. This argument also points out that it
makes the police department more
professional, which I love.

5. Argument #2
• Representative Nancy Pelosi said, " . . . the exclusionary
rule is what protects all Americans against unreasonable
searches and seizures and the invasion of privacy by law
enforcement officers. It does not undermine the ability of
the police to enforce the law; indeed, it has been part of
the training given to all federal law enforcement agents
since 1914. The directors of the FBI have endorsed the
exclusionary rule and have stated that the rule does not
hinder the FBI's work . . . the exclusionary rule works
because it creates an incentive for law enforcement officers
to know legal search and seizure standards. By passing this
bill, law enforcement will actually have an incentive not to
know the law." Source: Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)

6. Explanation
• Without this protection, citizens would be
vulnerable to having their rights violated.

7. Why I don’t agree with the opposing
side
• Without this rule there would be no reason
for warrants to exist
• Without this rule there would be no reason
for the 4th amendment to exist
• Without this rule police officers will become
ridiculous with unlawful searches