This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 24, 2021, and issued its decision on June 23, 2021.
The case centered on whether the Fourth Amendment “hot‑pursuit” exception creates a categorical rule that permits warrantless entry into a home when police chase a fleeing misdemeanor suspect.
Background and question before the Court
According to Justice Kagan, the question presented is whether the pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect always qualifies as an exigent circumstance.
What each side argues
Petitioner
According to Jeffrey L. Fisher, petitioner argues that there is no precedent for a categorical “pursuit rule” and that police may not enter a home without a magistrate’s approval unless an emergency exists.
Respondent
According to Mr. Harbourt, respondent contends that limiting the hot‑pursuit exception to felonies does not forbid warrantless entries in misdemeanor cases; it merely requires a case‑specific basis for entry.
Amicus
According to Amanda K. Rice, amicus counsel (Amanda K. Rice) defines the hot‑pursuit exception as a narrow rule that justifies warrantless home entry only when a suspect tries to thwart a lawful public arrest by outrunning an officer, and it does not depend on the classification of the underlying offense.
According to Constitutional Accountability Center, the Constitutional Accountability Center amicus seeks guidance from common‑law history to articulate a rule on warrantless entry.
According to United States, the United States amicus supports affirmance and notes that common law does not fully answer the question presented.
What happened at oral argument
Chief Justice Roberts asked whether allowing police to “just go ahead and knock on the door” would create a terribly dangerous situation.
Justice Thomas asked whether someone who disobeys an officer’s orders or resists arrest could be analogized to an escapee under common law.
According to Justice Kagan, justice Kagan questioned whether the pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect always qualifies as an exigent circumstance.
Justice Gorsuch asked whether a categorical rule for felonies would create an absurd incentive for states to elevate ordinary police‑lights violations to felonies.
Justice Kavanaugh asked whether exigent circumstances could justify a warrantless entry into a home without a warrant.
Justice Barrett asked whether resisting arrest could be considered a breach of the peace at common law.
According to Justice Alito, justice Alito questioned whether the rule would apply to an IRS officer chasing a tax‑evasion suspect into a house.
- [1] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 7
- [2] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 11
- [3] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 23
- [4] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 26
- [5] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 56
- [6] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 57
- [7] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 87
- [8] 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdf, p. 98
What the Court decided
The majority held that the common law does not support a categorical rule allowing warrantless home entry when a misdemeanant fees. It had a rule of that kind for felonies. But much as in Welsh centuries later, the common law made distinctions based on “the gravity of the underlying offense.”
The Court rejected the amicus’s broad view that any suspect, felony or misdemeanor, could be entered under a categorical hot‑pursuit rule.
The Court noted that common law historically distinguished the scope of hot‑pursuit based on the gravity of the underlying offense.
Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence clarified that an exigent circumstance includes a risk of escape, destruction of evidence, or harm to others, and that hot‑pursuit often gives rise to multiple exigencies.
Why it matters
Terms to know
- hot pursuit
- The hot‑pursuit exception justifies warrantless home entry in a narrow class of cases where a suspect tries to thwart a lawful public arrest by outrunning an officer to a dwelling; it does not depend on the classification of the underlying offense.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 07210c7bc690575a8ac1-r1-fa24f9592f389f71.pdfopinion
- 4c1cb84d19d155c13831-r1-5b03da1a84ab108d.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 28, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.