2 ms·

Yeah; there’s a case for the ninth and tenth, but that’s about it. And those never really work.

• MereInterest 3y ago
  Arguably, the fourth amendment, though this would be a rather large departure from its current interpretation. The fourth amendment states that “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” It does not state from whom these violations may not occur, so this clause would not be limited to violations being performed by the government. Therefore, this could be interpreted just as a limitation of the government against violating this right, but also the allowance of the government to prevent other violations.