I'm trying to understand the direct meaning of the Fourth Amendment as best as possible. The Amendment states the following (emphasis added):
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Is the statement that warrants require probable cause limited to the context of "unreasonable" searches and seizures, or was the idea that all searches and seizures, reasonable or otherwise, require a warrant? And in case Supreme Court precedent made the answer time-specific, I'm asking specifically how the Amendment would have been understood before Terry v. Ohio, as I want to know, as best as possible, which interpretation was originally held.
Before Terry, did only "unreasonable" searches or seizures require a warrant?