What does the exclusionary rule stipulate?

The exclusionary rule stipulates that evidence obtained through violations of a person’s constitutional rights, particularly those pertaining to unlawful searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment, cannot be used against that individual in a court of law. This rule is designed to discourage law enforcement from conducting illegal searches and to protect the integrity of the judicial process by ensuring that only legally obtained evidence is considered in legal proceedings. By excluding illegally obtained evidence, the rule aims to uphold the rights of individuals and maintain public confidence in the legal system.

In the context of the other choices, the claim that all evidence may be used in court does not align with the protections established by the exclusionary rule. The assertion that only physical evidence can be used negates the broader application of the rule, which extends to various forms of evidence, including testimonies derived from illegal sources. Finally, stating that oral statements are not affected by the rule overlooks the fact that the exclusionary rule can apply to statements made in violation of rights, such as those obtained without proper Miranda warnings. Thus, the correct choice emphasizes the principle that illegally obtained evidence, in any form, is not admissible in court.