Three quarters of a century ago, the Supreme Court expressed some thoughts on constitutional interpretation that bear repeating today (Weems v. United States): Time works changes, brings into existence new conditions and purposes. Therefore, a principle to be vital must be capable of wider application than the mischief which gave it birth. This is particularly true of constitutions .... [In interpreting] a constitution, therefore, our contemplation cannot be only of what has been but what may be. Under any other rule a constitution would indeed be as easyof application as it would be deficient in efficacy and power. The Fourth Amendment protects the right of the people to be secure in their persons, homes, papers, and effects, against unre...