In the case of United States v. Santana et al., 1975, the Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment when they pursued a suspect into her home without a warrant. The police had probable cause to arrest Ms. Santana for selling heroin after an undercover officer purchased drugs from her earlier in the day and identified her on sight outside of her house. When she retreated inside upon seeing them approach, they followed and arrested her within the threshold of her home. The court held that while generally warrants are required for entry into homes, this was an exception due to exigent circumstances - specifically "hot pursuit" of a fleeing felon where delay could result in destruction of evidence or escape.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Santana, Justice Marshall argued that the majority's decision to allow police officers to pursue a suspect into their home without a warrant was an erosion of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. He contended that the "hot pursuit" exception should only apply when there is immediate or continuous chase from a public place into private premises. In this case, he believed there was no such pursuit as Ms. Santana had not fled from an attempted public arrest but rather was standing in her doorway when first seen by police officers who then pursued her inside after she retreated back into her house upon seeing them approach. Furthermore, he disagreed with the characterization of Santana’s position in her doorway as being “in public,” arguing instead that it should be considered part of her home and thus deserving of greater privacy protection under law.