That landmark case made history as the exclusionary rule enforceable against the states through the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the same extent that it applied against the federal government.

"[1] In considering the restrictions which the Due Process Clause imposes upon states in regards to enforcement of criminal law, the Court does not stray far from the views expressed in Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937).

The Court does go on to find, through its selective incorporation doctrine, that the Fourth Amendment's proscription of unreasonable searches and seizures is "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty, and as such enforceable against the States through the Due Process Clause."

[2] The main consequence of the unanimous ruling in Weeks was that in a federal prosecution, the Fourth Amendment prohibited the use of evidence obtained by an illegal search and seizure.

Frankfurter notes, with apparent disapproval, that this 1914 ruling "was not derived from the explicit requirements of the Fourth Amendment," nor "based on legislation expressing Congressional policy in the enforcement of the Constitution."

He writes that because most of the English-speaking world "does not regard as vital … the exclusion of evidence such obtained," the Court must hesitate "to treat this remedy as an essential ingredient of the right."

Frankfurter writes that although the practice of exclusion of evidence is indeed an efficient way of deterring unlawful searches, the Court cannot condemn other equally effective methods as falling below the minimal standards required by the Due Process Clause.

In a concurring opinion, Associate Justice Hugo L. Black notes that as per his previous dissents, he agrees that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizure is enforceable against the states.

[3] He writes that he would be in favor of the reversal of the decision of the lower courts if he thought that the Fourth Amendment, by itself, barred not only unreasonable searches and seizures, but also the use of evidence so obtained.