When can the police enter the house without a warrant?

The Fourth Amendment requires the police to get a warrant if they want to search your home or anyplace else within your control. But the Supreme Court has long interpreted the Fourth Amendment to permit warrantless searches in emergency situations. We can talk about this broad exception to the Constitution's plain language and what it means for a constitutional democracy, but this exception is so widely accepted that we don't really debate it any longer, and the issue is now how the warrantless search applies in particular cases. Like this one, in which the Supreme Court finds the search was legal.

The case is Case v. Montana, issued on January 14, one of the first full rulings of the 2025-2026 Term. The police entered the house after getting an alarming phone call from Case's ex-girlfriend, JH, indicating that an erratic Case was going to kill himself. While on the phone with Case, JH heard the gun go off and then dead air, suggesting that Case was dead. JH called the police. 

The police showed up at Case's house; they knew he had mental health issues and alcohol problems and once tried suicide-by-cop. They tried to communicate with Case from outside the house, to no avail. So they entered the house without a warrant, deeming this an emergency. They found Case in the closet, and a shootout followed, injuring Case, who survived. He was charged with assaulting a police officer, but he moved to suppress all evidence obtained from the warrantless search, claiming it violated the Fourth Amendment.

The question is here is the standard of review in determining whether warrantless home searches violate the Fourth Amendment. Some courts, including the Second Circuit, hold that the police need probable cause to enter for purposes of rendering emergency services. Other courts hold the police to a reasonable suspicion standard, which is less burdensome than the probable cause test. 

The Court unanimously holds that the real standard is reasonable suspicion. The probable cause test only applies to criminal investigations, not cases like this, says Justice Kagan. Under the reasonable suspicion test, the search was legal. The officers had an objectively reasonable basis for believing that they had to enter the house to prevent serious harm, i.e., Case's erratic behavior that might result in someone's death or serious injury, including himself.