Skip to content
Project Curia
Supreme Court decisions
No. 24-624Jan 14, 2026Crime and Law EnforcementAffirmed

The question

Whether the objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid applies as stated in Brigham City v. Stuart, or should be recast in terms of reasonable suspicion or probable cause.

Case v. Montana

What the Court decided

Affirmed. The Court held that Brigham City's objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid applies without further gloss, and that the officers here satisfied it. The Court declined to recast the standard as either reasonable suspicion or probable cause, reasoning that probable cause is tied to criminal investigations and fits poorly in the non-investigatory emergency-aid setting. The officers had an objectively reasonable basis to believe entry was needed to prevent Case from ending his life.

How the justices split

Unanimous
In favor 9
Roberts
Thomas
Alito
Sotomayor
Kagan
Gorsuch
Kavanaugh
Barrett
Jackson

The Court's opinion

Kagan, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson

The emergency-aid exception to the warrant requirement is governed by Brigham City's objective reasonableness standard, which asks whether an officer had an objectively reasonable basis for believing that entry was needed to prevent or address serious harm. The Court rejected both the reasonable suspicion framing used in Montana's caretaker doctrine and Case's proposed probable-cause framing, holding that probable cause is peculiarly related to criminal investigations and fits awkwardly in the non-criminal emergency-aid setting. Applying that standard, the officers had an objectively reasonable basis to believe entry was needed to prevent Case from ending his life.

Concurring

Sotomayor, writing alone

Justice Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion. The syllabus does not state its reasoning.

Concurring

Gorsuch, writing alone

Justice Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion. The syllabus does not state its reasoning.

How we know · 5 sourced claims
  • The Court held that Brigham City's objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid applies without further gloss and was satisfied in this case.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Court declined to recast the emergency-aid standard in terms of probable cause, noting that probable cause is peculiarly related to criminal investigations.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The officers had an objectively reasonable basis for believing that entry was needed to prevent Case from ending his life.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Kagan, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

  • Sotomayor, J., and Gorsuch, J., filed concurring opinions.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

Read the opinion on supremecourt.gov