Reading inference — Fourth Amendment searches and warrants The paragraph states that the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. A search of a person’s home or personal effects requires a written warrant issued on probable cause, meaning a neutral judge must approve the factual basis before a search is conducted. This passage best supports that police cannot search a person’s home or private papers unless they have:

Introduction / Context:
This legal-reasoning question focuses on constitutional requirements for searching a home or private papers. The text emphasizes a written warrant, issued on probable cause by a neutral judge, as a prerequisite for such searches.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
• No search of home or personal effects may occur without a written search warrant.
• A neutral judge must approve the factual basis (probable cause) before the search.

Concept / Approach:
Reduce the requirement to its essence: police need lawful authorization—specifically a warrant based on probable cause approved by a judge. Among the options, “legal authorization” succinctly captures this requirement without adding unsupported specifics.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• B: Direct evidence is not required; probable cause can rest on reasonable facts short of direct proof.
• C: Reading rights relates to interrogations, not searches.
• D: “Reasonable belief” is imprecise; the passage specifies probable cause plus judicial approval.
• E: The judge approves the warrant; the judge need not be physically present during the search.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing probable cause with stricter or looser standards, or mixing interrogation safeguards with search requirements. Always match your answer to the exact procedural safeguard described.

Final Answer:
legal authorization