Complete misrepresentation of the facts noted in the decision.
Remember the exclusionary rule is a legal fiction of a liberal supreme court. There is no part of the Constitution that defines remedy for police wrongdoing.
I wonder if anybody wants to have that discussion.
Therefore, the Fourth Amendment has no meaning.
If there is no penalty for violating the Fourth Amendment, then there is no Fourth Amendment. The penalty, which is the long-accepted premise that one can not use 'fruit of the poisoned tree', meant evidence collected in violation of the Fourth was not admissible. This is a small penalty, indeed, but it was effective. Now that there is no penalty, the right ceases to exist.
The Soviet Union had a similar take: They wrote a very lofty bill of rights like our own. The only difference was, the government could violate any of those rights without penalty. Ergo, in practice, the citizenry had none of those written rights.