▁Court ▁stated ▁that ▁experience ▁had ▁shown ▁that ▁" such ▁rem ed ies ▁have ▁been ▁worth less ▁and ▁fut ile ". ▁▁ ▁The ▁Court ▁then ▁over ru led ▁Wolf , ▁r uling ▁instead ▁that ▁" all ▁evidence ▁obtained ▁by ▁searches ▁and ▁se iz ures ▁in ▁viol ation ▁of ▁the ▁Constitution ▁is , ▁by ▁that ▁same ▁authority , ▁in ad miss ible ▁in ▁a ▁state ▁court ." ▁Justice ▁Clark ▁stated ▁that ▁without ▁the ▁ex clusion ary ▁rule , ▁the ▁Four th ▁Am end ment ' s ▁prote ctions ▁against ▁un reason able ▁searches ▁and ▁se iz ures ▁would ▁be ▁merely ▁" a ▁form ▁of ▁words " ▁that ▁would ▁be ▁" val uel ess ▁and ▁und es erving ▁of ▁mention ▁in ▁a ▁perpet ual ▁char ter ▁of ▁in est im able ▁human ▁libert ies ". ▁And ▁because ▁prior ▁cases ▁had ▁ruled ▁that ▁the ▁Four teenth ▁Am end ment ▁incorpor ated ▁the ▁Four th ▁Am end ment ▁against ▁the ▁states , ▁the ▁Court ▁held ▁that ▁this ▁reasoning ▁applied ▁equally ▁to ▁federal ▁and ▁state ▁criminal ▁proceed ings . ▁In ▁a ▁frequently ▁quoted ▁passage , ▁Justice ▁Clark ▁reason ed : ▁ ▁Justice ▁Clark ▁concluded ▁the ▁Court ' s ▁opinion ▁by ▁re iter ating ▁how ▁the ▁" ign o ble ▁shortcut " ▁around ▁the ▁Four th ▁Am end ment ▁that ▁Wolf ▁had ▁left ▁open ▁to ▁state ▁law ▁enfor cement ▁officers ▁had ▁" t end [ ed ] ▁to ▁destroy ▁the ▁entire ▁system ▁of ▁constitution al ▁rest raint s ▁on ▁which ▁the ▁libert ies ▁of ▁the ▁people ▁rest ," ▁and ▁revers