This article discusses the contrast of two landmark United States Supreme Court cases that helped clearly define how the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the American Constitution are interpreted. , and analyzes the difference between the “Constitution” and the “Constitutional Law”. Two cases referenced in this analysis are (1) Katz v. United States, 386 US 954 (United States, March 13, 1967), and (2) Olmstead v. United States, 277 US 438 (United States, June 4, 1928). who differed in his decision; one ends up overthrowing the other. Finally, a conclusion is drawn about the importance of these decisions in the lives of Americans. Constitution versus Constitutional Law The Fourth (4th) Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, papers and instruments against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized” (Kanovitz, 2010). Courts use a two-part test to determine whether, at the time of the search, a defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place or items searched (Kanovitz, 2010). First, did the person actually expect a certain level of privacy? Second, are the person's expectations objectively reasonable, and is society prepared to recognize them? (Kanovitz, 2010). However, for the 4th Amendment to be enforced, the United States Supreme Court acted based on the powers guaranteed by Congress to protect and enforce the Constitution. The 4th Amendment does not clearly define exactly what an unreasonable search and seizure is, thus leaving interpretation to the discretion of the elements...... middle of paper ...... It is 'a landmark decision that has since redefined and clarified the intended meaning of how the 4th Amendment is applied to today's civil liberties. ReferencesKanovitz, JR (2010). Constitutional Law (12th ed.). (ER Ebben, ed.) New Providence, NJ, USA: Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., LexisNexis Gorup.Katz v. United States, 386 US 954 (United States, March 13, 1967). FindLaw http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgibin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=386&invol=954Olmstead v. United States, 277 US 438 (United States, June 4, 1928). Cornell University Law School; Legal Information Center; http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0277_0438_ZS.htmlSilverman v. United States, 365 US 505, 511 p.353. (United States, March 6, 1961). Justia.com ; http://supreme.justia.com/us/365/505/case.html