Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Mancusi v. DeForte — Dissent

I wish to repeat here what I have indicated before, that this seems to me a rather inopportune time to create a single rule more than the Constitution plainly requires to block conviction of guilty persons by keeping out probably the most reliable kind of evidence that can be offered.
A corporate or union official suffers no personal injury when the business office he occupies as an agent of the corporation or union is invaded and when records he has prepared and safeguarded as an agent are seized.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Mancusi v. DeForte — Dissent

The invasion by the Government may disrupt the functioning of the office, prevent employees from performing their duties, and result in disclosure of business matters the company or union wished to keep secret. But all these are injuries only to the corporation or union as such. The organization has every right to challenge such intrusions whenever they occur-if the seizure is illegal, the records obtained can be suppressed in a prosecution against the organization, and if no prosecution is initiated, the organization can obtain return of all the documents by bringing a civil action.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Mancusi v. DeForte — Dissent

In fact the Court's opinion indicates to me that the Court is preparing the way to use Jones to eliminate entirely the requirement for standing to raise a search and seizure question and to permit a search to be challenged at any time, at any place, and under all circumstances, regardless of the defendant's relationship to the person or place searched or to the things seized.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature