In the case of Bennie Dean Herring v. United States, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government by a 5-4 vote. The issue at hand was whether evidence obtained through an arrest due to negligent record-keeping errors should be suppressed under the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule - which typically excludes evidence gathered illegally or unconstitutionally from being used in court proceedings. In this instance, Herring had been arrested based on incorrect information that he had an outstanding warrant; during his arrest and subsequent search, drugs and a firearm were found on him. However, it was later discovered that there was no active warrant for his arrest as it had been withdrawn five months prior but not updated in police records due to clerical error. The majority opinion held that since law enforcement did not deliberately act unlawfully or show systemic negligence when they made their mistake about Herring’s warrant status, suppression would have little deterrent effect and thus wasn't warranted under these circumstances. Therefore, even though there were mistakes made leading up to his arrest (and therefore potentially violating Fourth Amendment rights), because those mistakes weren’t deliberate or indicative of widespread issues within law enforcement practices/systems themselves – they didn’t justify suppressing key evidence against him.

In the dissenting opinion for Bennie Dean Herring v. United States, Justice Ginsburg argued that the majority's decision undermined the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. She contended that police negligence should not be excused simply because it was not deliberate or reckless, as this would allow law enforcement to evade responsibility for their errors. Furthermore, she pointed out that there were systemic problems with recordkeeping in many jurisdictions which could lead to more innocent people being wrongfully arrested due to outdated or incorrect information in databases. Therefore, she believed that suppressing evidence obtained through such mistakes would incentivize better recordkeeping practices by law enforcement agencies.