“It is important to be clear about what occurred in this case: The Government physically occupied private property for the purpose of obtaining information,” Scalia wrote. “We have no doubt that such a physical intrusion would have been considered a ‘search’ within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when it was adopted.”
Scalia also joined the majority in a 2009 decision that limited the circumstances under which police can search the cars of people under arrest.
As Kevin Russell of SCOTUSblog noted at the time, when an assistant solicitor general suggested during an oral argument that a car could be searched after a traffic violation for evidence of a different crime, Scalia was incredulous. via – U.S. News.