"[6] General writs of assistance played an important role in the increasing tensions that led to the American Revolution and the creation of the United States of America.
The crisis began on 27 December 1760 when news of King George II's death reached Boston and the people of Massachusetts learned that all writs faced termination.
Otis gave the speech of his life, making references to liberty, English common law, "a man's house is his castle," and the colonists's "rights as Englishmen.
[13][11][12][14] In a pamphlet published in 1765, Otis expanded his argument that the general writs violated the British unwritten constitution hearkening back to the Magna Carta.
[15] A writ of assistance was used in an incident known as the "Malcom Affair", which was described by legal scholar William Cuddihy as "the most famous search in colonial America.
On 24 September 1766, customs officials in Boston, with a deputy sheriff, searched merchant Daniel Malcom's home, which was also his place of business.
No violence occurred, but reports written by Governor Francis Bernard and the customs officials created the impression in Britain that a riot had taken place.
[18] Several years later, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution also contained a particularity requirement that outlawed the use of writs of assistance (and all general search warrants) by the federal government.
[25][26] Statutory writs of assistance were described by the Exchequer Court of Canada (now the Federal Court) as "in effect, search warrants unrelated to any particular suspected offence and of continuing operation, which are issued to members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and other officers in the service of the Government of Canada to have effect as long as the holder continues to hold the position by virtue of which the writ was issued to him.
"[27] Perhaps more concisely, one commentator described the legal effect of a writ of assistance as, "to all intents and purposes, a blanket warrant" which "authorizes the holder to search for particular things (e.g., controlled drugs or smuggled goods) anywhere and at any time.
Rather, as noted by the Law Reform Commission of Canada in a 1983 report, "[i]n essence, they are documents that identify their holders as members of a specific class of peace officers with special powers of warrantless search and seizure.
[30] In 1984, the Ontario Court of Appeal declared statutory writs of assistance to be contrary to section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.