By allowing unconstitutionally obtained evidence to be used in the court room, you're neglecting a person's rights and completely disregarding the "innocent until proven guilty" concept.
This isn't entirely true. For one, I'm not sure that the supreme court has made it the right of anyone to have evidence tossed out in court. Furthermore, it doesn't make much logical sense either, the crime was committed, should we penalize ourselves by having that evidence thrown out? Let's put it this way, suppose a criminal was caught and before the police read him his rights he confessed to the murder, presented the murder weapon, provided plenty of evidence that he had committed the crime. Is that evidence now off-limits and not acceptable in a court of law because he wasn't read his Miranda Rights first? In this hypothetical example, criminals could game the system (don't press me on this issue please, it is, after all, hypothetical).
This was actually one of the first cases I heard about this year and some of my club mates were interested in piloting it, so I did some research on the subject early.
I would argue Significance in light of several supreme court decisions: United States v. Leon
(1984), Nix v. Williams
(1984), and Stone v. Powell
(1976). Here's a short excerpt from the fifteenth edition of "Essential Supreme Court Decisions: Summaries of Leading Cases in US Constitutional Law" by John R. Vile (I highly recommend the book as a reference manual for debate rounds).
Professor Vile on Page 314 (15th edition) wrote:
The Fourth Amendment does not specify what shall happen in cases where the government conducts illegal searches and seizures, but the Suprem Court has developed the exclusionary rule largely in an attempt to deter illegal police conduct in such cases. Originally applied only to the national government in Weeks v. United States (1914), the Court extended this rule to the states in Mapp v. Ohio (1961). Largely because this rule often results in the loss of probative evidence, since then the Court has carved out a number of exceptions, as when government officials act in reasonable good faith, United States v. Leon (1984), or when courts believe that information obtained in a search would otherwise have been the result of "inevitable discovery," Nix v. Williams (1984).
Hope you find that helpful!