Are you aware of your 4^th Amendment Constitutional rights? 

This is the law that protects US citizens from unlawful police searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution protects personal privacy, and citizen's right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into their persons, homes, businesses, and property. This applies to citizens on the street, citizens driving in their vehicles, and citizens within their homes or places of business.  Fourth Amendment "search and seizure" protections extends to police searches of places and items in which an individual has a legitimate expectation of privacy -- his or her person, clothing, purse, luggage, vehicle, house, apartment, hotel room, and place of business, to name a few examples.

Ideally, according to the 4^th amendment, a police officer may not search or seize an individual or his or her property unless the officer has a valid arrest warrant, a valid search warrant, or a belief rising to the level of probable cause that an individual has committed a crime.

According to some, the decision on a court case stemming from a drug case out of Kentucky could potentially amend the constitutional right.

The Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, said police officers who knock on a door in search of illegal drugs and then hear sounds suggesting evidence is being destroyed may break down and enter without a search warrant.

It began when police in Lexington, KY. were following a suspect who allegedly had sold crack cocaine to an informer and then walked into an apartment building. They did not see which apartment he entered, but when they smelled marijuana smoke come from one of the apartments, the officers announced they were coming in, and they broke down the door. They found Hollis King smoking marijuana, and put him under arrest. They also found powder cocaine. King was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 11 years in prison.

Although the Kentucky Supreme Court overturned his conviction and ruled the apartment break-in violated his 4th Amendment right, an appeal from state prosecutors caused the Supreme Court to reverse the ruling. Alito said the police conduct in this case "was entirely lawful," and they were justified in breaking down the door to prevent the destruction of the evidence.

In the past, Justice Alito has said that "the 4th Amendment has drawn a firm line at the entrance to the house."

His ruling in this case took a different tone. “The sounds of people moving and perhaps toilets being flushed could justify police entering without a warrant,” Alito said.

Justice Ginsburg disagreed. She said the court's approach "arms the police with a way to routinely dishonor the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement in drug cases.”

It begins with a drug case in Kentucky, but some wonder, where will it end?