Why are warrants preferred according to Coolidge v New Hampshire?

Warrants are preferred, as articulated in the case of Coolidge v. New Hampshire, primarily to protect citizens from police overreach. The decision underscores the fundamental principle that the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides a safeguard against unreasonable searches and seizures. By requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant, which necessitates probable cause and judicial oversight, the legal system aims to balance the need for effective policing with the protection of individual rights. This process helps ensure that searches and seizures are conducted lawfully, preventing arbitrary actions by law enforcement and thereby upholding civil liberties. The case emphasizes the importance of this judicial check to maintain societal trust and a fair legal process.