The Supreme Court's restriction of wiretapping as a violation of the Fourth Amendment primarily stems from the 1967 case Katz v. United States. In this decision, the Court ruled that wiretapping constituted a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment, requiring a warrant based on probable cause. The ruling emphasized the protection of individuals' privacy rights and established the "reasonable expectation of privacy" test, determining that government surveillance must respect this expectation to comply with constitutional standards.
The Supreme Court's ruling that chemical castration is a violation of the Eighth Amendment is justified because it prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
Supreme court
Mapp v. Ohio
Somehow it all traces back to the constitution
There is no thu amendment.
It could be argued that prohibition violated the freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment. However, according to multiple state supreme court decisions going back to 1855, prohibition laws were a violation of the US Constitution. This is why The 18th Amendment needed to be written to enact prohibition.
ninth amendment
14th Amendment
Polygamy is not in any amendment, it was outlawed by a Supreme Court decision.
Sounds like you're wanting to record the police, as is your constitutional right to do so. Title 54 Criminal Procedure Chapter 959a Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance, covers all the laws pertaining to wiretapping. Even If the states law effectively declares recording Police to be illegal, the Supreme Court has ruled that it's a protected constitutional right to record police in public areas.
6th Amendment
Whenever a U. S. President is in violation of the law as interpreted by the U. S. Supreme Court (or even if he/she is in violation of a law that the Supreme Court has not tested), it is the responsibility of Congress to impeach him/her.