Replies

You never did answer this prior question in regards to women and the BoR. Although few of them owned property in the late 18th or early 19th century for those that did and lived alone wouldn't they have been protected from unwarranted searches and seizures as guaranteed in the Fourth Amendment?

Or because they weren't males and therefore unable to vote could the government have barged in without a warrant and for no reason if they felt like it?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

"Or because they weren't males and therefore unable to vote could the government have barged in without a warrant and for no reason if they felt like it?"

The federal government, yes. And I doubt that those federal agents who barged in to a woman's home with no reason (other than "they felt like it") would have a job the next day.

Your hypotheticals are fantasy and inflammatory. Get real. Next time I won't answer.

"While this textual exegesis is by no means conclusive, it suggests that “the people” protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community."
-- United States v. Verdugo- Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990)