{"id":37401,"date":"2019-04-27T09:10:34","date_gmt":"2019-04-27T14:10:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=37401"},"modified":"2019-04-27T09:10:34","modified_gmt":"2019-04-27T14:10:34","slug":"national-law-review-sixth-circuit-amends-chalking-decision-to-clarify-scope","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=37401","title":{"rendered":"National Law Review: Sixth Circuit Amends \u201cChalking\u201d Decision to Clarify Scope"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>National Law Review: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.natlawreview.com\/article\/sixth-circuit-amends-chalking-decision-to-clarify-scope\">Sixth Circuit Amends \u201cChalking\u201d Decision to Clarify Scope<\/a><br \/>\n<!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Earlier this week, the Sixth Circuit issued a decision addressing a constitutional challenge to the practice of \u201cchalking\u201d the tires of parked cars for parking enforcement purposes. As we noted, that decision garnered a lot of attention from the national media.<\/p>\n<p>Yesterday, the Court issued an amended opinion clarifying the scope of its ruling. The amended opinion contains the following new paragraph in its conclusion:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Taking the allegations in Taylor\u2019s complaint as true, we hold that chalking is a search under the Fourth Amendment, specifically under the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Jones. This does not mean, however, that chalking violates the Fourth Amendment. Rather, we hold, based on the pleading stage of this litigation, that two exceptions to the warrant requirement\u2014the \u201ccommunity caretaking\u201d exception and the motor-vehicle exception\u2014do not apply here. Our holding extends no further than this. When the record in this case moves beyond the pleadings stage, the City is, of course, free to argue anew that one or both of those exceptions do apply, or that some other exception to the warrant requirement might apply.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>National Law Review: Sixth Circuit Amends \u201cChalking\u201d Decision to Clarify Scope<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-37401","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37401","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=37401"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37401\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":37402,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37401\/revisions\/37402"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=37401"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=37401"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=37401"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}