Read this scenario applying to the bill of rights.

in april, 2013, tristan used his cell phone during church to text messages to his friend kavan. he suggested they meet up at the nearby park after church. kavan sent on the invitation to other friends. once the boys got to the park, fbi agents were waiting for them. hand me your cell phone, one of the agents said. why we intercepted several suspicious messages sent about an hour ago. tristan handed over his cell phone.
© 2013 flvs

which of tristan's constitutional rights was violated?

freedom of religion
freedom of assembly
protection against unlawful accusations
protection against unwarranted search and seizure

Protection against unwanted search and seizure

Explanation:

Freedom of religion wasn't violated because the FBI aren't trying to prevent him from practicing his religion.

Freedom of assembly is wrong because the FBI isn't preventing them from getting each other.

Protection against unlawful accusations is also incorrect because their is no unlawful accusation in intercepting suspicious messages.

This obviously leaves protection against unwarranted searches and seizures because the FBI took Tristians phone without gaining a warrant from a judge that would legally allow them to take it.

Protection against unwarranted search and seizure is the answer.

Brainliest would help a lot!!

"quid pro quo" harassment takes place when a supervisor requires sex, sexual favors, or sexual contact from an employee/job candidate as a condition of their employment. only supervisors who have the authority to make tangible employment actions (i.e. hire, fire, promote, can commit "quid pro quo" harassment.

arsonist charge

explanation:

when you light somebody's property on fire you are considered and arsonist and are charged with an arsonist charge