What principle does Steagald v. US establish regarding searching third-party residences?

The case of Steagald v. US establishes that law enforcement officials cannot search a third-party residence without a warrant, even if they have probable cause to believe that the suspect they are seeking is present. This ruling is grounded in the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The court emphasized that the government has a strong interest in protecting the privacy rights of individuals in their homes, and the warrant requirement serves as a critical safeguard.

In Steagald, the Supreme Court extended the protections of the Fourth Amendment by ruling that a search warrant is necessary to enter a home where a suspect may be found, unless an exception applies. This means that, when pursuing a suspect who may be hiding in a friend's or family member's home, officers must first secure a warrant to search that residence. The reasoning behind this principle is to prevent arbitrary government intrusion into private dwellings, thereby upholding individual privacy rights.

This principle is foundational in guiding law enforcement's understanding of their authority when it comes to searching locations where they believe a suspect may be located, reinforcing the necessity of respecting the legal rights of all residents, not just the primary suspect.