Even if you’re not a criminal, the government—nosy busybody that it can be—might still violate your rights with an illegal search.
I’ve written before about how the government can be nosy (https://lnkd.in/gaWmSxCG). That serves it well in ferreting out crime. Consequently, most caselaw on the Fourth Amendment (which protects us from unreasonable government searches and seizures) arises from criminal prosecutions.
But the government also conducts searches for non-criminal reasons, and the Constitution applies to those searches, too. For instance, it protects weekenders from overzealous building inspectors and zoning officials. That’s what happened here.
A couple bought a large wooded property in rural Michigan, where they planned to have family getaways. (In a post about the best advice I ever received, I noted that Michigan is a sportsman’s paradise: https://lnkd.in/gD7HPBiz.)
There was already a small cabin on the property, but the couple has a big family so they installed several prefab cabins for their adult children. Such “tiny homes” have been all the rage for a while now. (Where I’m from, we always called those sheds.)
A neighbor to the couple’s new woodland paradise didn’t care for their expansion, so he called the local authorities. Heck yes, they were interested.
First, the neighbor drove a building inspector, a zoning administrator, and a health department official onto the couple’s property (while they weren’t there) via the driveway. Then he escorted them onto the property on foot through a densely wooded adjacent parcel.
They didn’t have a warrant to enter the property. The couple hadn’t invited them in or consented to an inspection. They didn’t even yet know about this intrusion instigated by their meddling neighbor.
The officials measured the distance from the property line of that adjacent parcel to the prefab cabins and found they violated “setback” rules. They also peered in windows to see that there were no smoke detectors.
As you can imagine, these local government officials were incensed at this lawlessness. They fined the couple.
The couple fought back. They sued the officials for conducting an unreasonable search. The officials responded by claiming “qualified immunity.” The trial court denied them qualified immunity and granted summary judgment for the couple. The officials appealed.
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the lower court. First, even weekend homes are protected. Second, the protection extends to the “curtilage” (the area around a home). Third, there are exceptions to the warrant requirement but none apply here. Besides, the government’s interest here was “insubstantial.” They could’ve knocked on the front door, but no sneaking around and peeking in windows.
At the time of the search, all this was well established; they should’ve known better. No qualified immunity.
All that remains now is to assess damages.
You can read the opinion here: https://lnkd.in/gtKzS4DN.