In the case of Minnesota v. Wayne Thomas Carter (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police officers who had entered Carter's apartment without a warrant to arrest him for drug possession had violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The court determined that although an informant had tipped off the police about Carter's illegal activities, this did not justify their entry into his home without obtaining a search warrant first. The ruling emphasized that even if there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, law enforcement must still respect individuals' constitutional rights by following proper legal procedures before conducting searches or making arrests in private residences.

In the dissenting opinion for Minnesota v. Wayne Thomas Carter, Justice Ginsburg disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a warrantless search of a defendant's apartment based on an officer’s observation of drug activity through a window. She argued that this violated Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The justice emphasized that people have an expectation of privacy in their homes, which should not be invaded without proper justification or consent. In her view, merely observing suspicious behavior from outside does not give police officers sufficient cause to enter and search someone's home without obtaining a warrant first. This case was seen as setting potentially dangerous precedent by allowing law enforcement too much discretion in deciding when they can bypass constitutional protections against unwarranted intrusions into private spaces.