最高法院辩论警方在紧急情况下是否需要有正当理由在没有逮捕证的情况下进入家中。 Supreme Court debates whether police need probable cause to enter homes during emergencies without a warrant.

美国最高法院在 " Case v. Montana* " 一案中听取了口头辩论,这是一个案例,检验警察是否必须有在紧急情况下在没有逮捕证的情况下进入住宅的可能原因(或 " 合理信念 " 等较低标准)。 The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in *Case v. Montana*, a case testing whether police must have probable cause—or a lower standard like "reasonable belief"—to enter a home without a warrant during emergencies. 这起案件源于2021年在蒙大拿州发生的一起事件,警方在911电话后进入威廉·特雷弗·凯斯的家中,声称他可能是自杀的,导致他被枪杀并被起诉. The case stems from a 2021 incident in Montana where officers entered William Trevor Case’s home after a 911 call alleging he might be suicidal, resulting in him being shot and charged. 法院正在审查是否应该加强目前的紧急援助例外规定,即根据合理的危险信念允许无证入境。 The Court is reviewing whether the current emergency aid exception, allowing warrantless entry based on a reasonable belief of danger, should be tightened. 有些法官对改变的必要性提出质疑,而另一些法官则对隐私和潜在的虐待表示关切。 While some justices questioned the need for change, others expressed concern over privacy and potential abuse. 预计将在2025年晚些时候作出决定,并可能为紧急警察入境设定国家标准。 A decision is expected later in 2025 and could set a national standard for emergency police entries.