In the United States v. Salvucci et al., 1979, the Supreme Court ruled that defendants do not automatically have standing to suppress evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment simply because they were charged with a crime involving that evidence. The case involved two men who were convicted for possessing stolen mail after police found it during an illegal search of their apartment. They argued that this violated their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, but the court disagreed, stating they had no reasonable expectation of privacy in stolen property. This ruling overturned previous "automatic standing" doctrine established by Jones v. United States (1960), which allowed anyone charged with a crime to challenge any government action related to it.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Salvucci, Justice Brennan disagreed with the majority's decision to overrule Jones v. United States and eliminate automatic standing in Fourth Amendment cases. He argued that this change would result in unnecessary litigation about property rights, which is irrelevant to privacy interests protected by the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, he believed that it could lead to absurd results where defendants are unable to challenge unlawful searches because they lack a possessory interest in seized items or places searched - even if their privacy was violated during these searches. Justice Brennan also criticized the majority for not providing any compelling reasons why Jones should be overturned and suggested that its decision might have been influenced more by an ideological shift than legal principles or precedent.