A discussion of viable alternatives to the exclusionary rule focuses on a system under which the executive branch disciplines its own people, the creation of a civil tort remedy for victims of searches and seizures, and trials of police officers alleged to have made illegal searches. An advocate of the exclusionary rule argues that it should be preserved because it provides the public with symbolic reassurance that the Government is committed to the basic values of privacy, the rule of law, and fairness. An analysis of the basis of the rule notes that it is a rule of evidence rather than a mandate of the Constitution and that Congress may become increasingly likely to replace it with a more appropriate means of dealing with illegal searches and seizures. Other papers discuss applications of the rule in decisions of the United States Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, possible modifications of the rule, the good faith exception to the rule, and the application of the rule to forfeiture proceedings. Each paper includes reference notes.