Police won't say how many calls and messages have been received or whether they're addressed to a specific justice. Court spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan told The Times of Munster the threats are mostly directed at police officers.

The state's highest court ruled Thursday that Indiana residents have no right to resist police making an unlawful police entry into their homes.

The court's decision stemmed from a Vanderburgh County case in which a man yelled at police and blocked them from entering his apartment to investigate a domestic disturbance. The man shoved a police officer who entered anyway and was shocked with a stun gun and arrested.

In a 3-2 decision written by Justice Steven David, the court ruled that people confronted with an illegal police entry into their homes should allow entry and sue later for damages.

It said resisting entry increases the risk of escalating violence. The decision overturned centuries of common law.

"We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said in the ruling.

Justices Robert Rucker and Brent Dickson dissented, saying the ruling runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure.

"In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally -- that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances," Rucker said.

Both dissenting justices suggested they would have supported the ruling if the court had limited its scope to stripping the right to resist officers who enter homes illegally in cases where they suspect domestic violence is being committed.

State Sen. Mike Young, R-Indianapolis, said he plans to craft legislation for the next session of the General Assembly that would essentially overturn the court ruling.

"Most people think we have the right to protect ourselves from illegal entry of our homes and upon our person, and this just threw it away," he said.

People 6News spoke with Tuesday were split on the issue.

"I think it's wrong. Privacy is privacy," one person said.

"I feel like it's the Soviet Union," another person said.

"I can see where a lot of people would be upset about that," Clint Evrard said. "At the same time, if people have nothing to hide, if they're not doing anything wrong in the first place, there shouldn't be that big of a worry."