[TChris]

It's worth noting that every single member of the Supreme Court agrees that the "knock and announce" requirement is a requirement of the Fourth Amendment, and today's holding DOES NOT CHANGE THAT. Scalia acknowledges that a failure of police to knock and announce IS a Fourth Amendment violation--he merely states that exclusion is not the proper remedy. No one--no one--claims that a failure to knock and announce is not a Fourth Amendment violation. Shoot, even the State conceded there was a Fourth Amendment violation in this case.

Then, it's your position that every no-knock warrant is a blatant, judicially sanctioned violation of the Fourth Amendment?

[Publius Valerius]

The Court has crafted exceptions to the knock and announce rule, and I am of the opinion that these exceptions are wrongly decided. Unfortunately, these exceptions are yet another Fourth Amendment casualty of the War on Drugs.

Regardless of my opinion, though, the Court has created a number of exceptions--but, of course, the rule is clear, and still is after today's decision: a no-knock warrant is generally unconstitutional.