http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/02/national/02SCOT.html
An Illinois state appellate court ruled that "impounding" a home (police not letting someone enter their home) for the time needed to get a search warrant violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable seizures.
The Clinton-Gore administration entered the case on the side of the (Republican) Illinois State administration, seeking to overturn this elementary recognition of traditional civil liberties. (Incidentally, totally in keeping with the horrific record of Clinton-Gore expanding police power justified by "war on drugs" and "anti-terrorism" spew) - with this result (the "evidence" referred to is a 1/12th of an ounce (!) of pot):
"...The Clinton administration entered the case on behalf of the state. Matthew D. Roberts, an assistant solicitor general, told the justices that impounding a home served the "strong law enforcement interest in preserving evidence."
That drew an objection from Justice Scalia.
"There is a considerable interest on the part of an individual in going into his own home," Justice Scalia said, mentioning the need to attend to a child, take something off a stove, or turn off a computer..."