The Aporia · Today in Supreme Court History: September 29, 2005

Today in Supreme Court History: September 29, 2005

Read the original at Reason ↗

Cite

APA MLA Chicago

Blackman, J. (2026, September 29). Today in Supreme Court History: September 29, 2005. Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/29/today-in-supreme-court-history-september-29-2005-7/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

AI analysis

Story summary

On September 29, 2005, the Supreme Court heard arguments in *Georgia v. Randolph*, a case involving whether police need consent from all occupants of a residence to conduct a search when one occupant objects and the other consents. The case centered around James Randolph who objected to a warrantless entry into his home by police, while his wife had given them permission. The decision ultimately favored Randolph, affirming that law enforcement must obtain explicit consent from all occupants for searches in such situations. This ruling reinforced individual privacy rights and set an important precedent regarding Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.

Written for “Supreme Court History” on 2026-11-02, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges an unknown share of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.

The Road Not Taken in Trump v. Barbara Different event

Reason

⚖️ Leans right Hedges 2 of 12 claims Outlet record 67/100

“The articles discuss different Supreme Court-related topics and dates, indicating they are not describing the same specific event.”

A Few More Thoughts On The Missouri Ruling Different event

Reason

⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 2 of 44 claims Outlet record 67/100

“Article A discusses reflections on a recent Missouri redistricting case ruling, while Article B appears to be about historical events in Supreme Court history on September 29, 2005.”

Justice Alito makes abrupt U-turn on major Supreme Court case Different event

Daily Mail

⚖️ Leans left Hedges 3 of 14 claims Outlet record 68/100

“The articles describe different events - one is about Justice Alito's recusal from a climate case, while the other appears to be historical context or an anniversary related to Supreme Court proceedings.”

Buschbacher: Did Prof. Adler File His Amicus Brief for the Wrong Side in Suncor? Different event

Reason

Hedges 18 of 87 claims Outlet record 67/100

“The articles discuss different aspects related to Supreme Court activities but do not describe the same specific incident.”

JONATHAN TURLEY: Justice Alito blazes the ethical path the Supreme Court should take Different event

Fox News

⚖️ Leans left Hedges 7 of 36 claims Outlet record 69/100

“The articles discuss different dates and events related to Justice Alito's actions; Article A is about historical context on September 29, while Article B specifically mentions Justice Alito recusing himself from a case on September 28.”

Somehow the N.Y. Times Made Me Sympathetic To Chief Justice Roberts Different event

Reason

Hedges 1 of 28 claims Outlet record 67/100

“Article A is about historical Supreme Court events on a specific date, while Article B discusses Chief Justice Roberts' activities after a previous court decision.”

How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted

sentences that state something as happening or true

Uncertain

no claims

nothing to measure

Leaning

not political

takes no side on a contested political question

Publisher signals

67/100

Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.

Outlets on this story

Politics

Same framing elsewhere

none derived

Analyzed 2026-09-29 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability

Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 1052 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected

Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

2026-10-02

Would a Firing Squad Have Been More 'Humane' for Christa Pike?

2026-09-26

"I Will Not Stand for Being Jerked Around … by Any Lawyer Who Practices Before Me"

2026-09-18

New Article: Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections: Bringing Clarity To The Necessary and Proper Clause

2026-09-05

Lawyers' Responsibility for Hallucinations in Briefs That They Sign

Who wrote this

Josh Blackman

88 article(s) here · 0 carrying a prediction

🔮 I thought it might be worthwhile to dig into the numbers a bit more.

2026-10-30 · assertive framing · Supreme Court Clerks Who Become Law Professors (2012-2026)

🔮 Today the law firm of Weil Gotshal announced that it would wind down.

2026-10-28 · assertive framing · Farewell to Weil

🔮 And her unwillingness to participate in any disciplinary proceedings suggests something is amiss.

2026-10-28 · assertive framing · The Bigger Problem With Judge Ada Brown's Woke Tirade: She Said The Quiet Part Out Loud About "White Saviors"

🔮 Longtime readers will recall that I took mileage runs to Singapore, Hong Kong, and Sydney to make status at the end of the year.

2026-10-28 · assertive framing · 1,000,000 Miles on United

🔮 Let's hope that people across the media industry will take Josh Blackman's criticism to heart.

2026-10-27 · assertive framing · The Wall Street Journal Praises The Old Gray Lady

🔮 New from Reason: a look into what Javier Milei has accomplished and what it will take to make the most of Argentina’s window for real change.

2026-10-26 · assertive framing · Today in Supreme Court History: October 26, 1774

🔮 ] There have been many news reports suggesting that the United States Department of Justice may pursue denaturalization proceedings against Representative Ilhan Omar.

2026-10-22 · mixed framing · What Happens to Representative Ilhan Omar's Congressional Seat if the United States Files Suit to Denaturalize Her?

🔮 Nevertheless, the next two decades would vastly enlarge the president's powers as Congress' authority over the executive branch would be greatly diminished.

2026-10-20 · assertive framing · New in SCOTUSBlog: "The separation and expansion of powers between Congress and the president"

🔮 Justice Sotomayor, Justice Gorsuch, Justice Barrett, and Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

2026-10-19 · mixed framing · Four Justices Recuse From Petition By Publishing Companies And New Grant on Disparate Impact

🔮 The regulations for Freedmen schools in Texas provided that classes would begin at 9 A.M. and "[t]he morning Exercises will commence with either the singing of an appropriate hymn, or prayer, or the reading of the Scriptures."

2026-10-13 · assertive framing · New Essay: "The Establishment Clause At The Second Founding"

Also by Josh Blackman