Warrantless ‘searches’ (which really should be called intrusions) of a person’s property are one of those things that makes me go from 0-to-boogaloo with no stops in-between. It seems that some .gov organizations (local, usually) feel that they’re exempt from needing warrants to roam your property for reasons.
One situation I had been following closely is a case in Tennessee where game wardens, in the name of pursuing their mandate, can come onto people’s property surreptitiously, leave surveillance devices, monitor the property, and it’s all kosher because…reasons, I guess.
To my simplistic way of thinking, unless there’s some truly exigent circumstances, any badge-wearer or .gov employee has zero business being on Zero’s property uninvited.
Apparently a court in Tennessee has agreed with my sentiment:
JACKSON, Tenn.—Late yesterday, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee at Jackson affirmedthat the Tennessee Constitution bars game wardens from conducting warrantless searches of private property. The ruling upholds a circuit court victory for Benton County landowners Terry Rainwaters and Hunter Hollingsworth. Terry and Hunter sued with the Institute for Justice (IJ) after the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) ignored their “No Trespassing” signs by entering and installing cameras on their land. The victory applies broadly to all private land Tennesseans have put to “actual use,” whether by fencing, farming, posting, gating, hunting, fishing, camping, or otherwise.
….
“This decision is a massive win for property rights in Tennessee,” said IJ Attorney and Elfie Gallun Fellow in Freedom and the Constitution Joshua Windham. “TWRA claimed unfettered power to put on full camouflage, invade people’s land, roam around as it pleases, take photos, record videos, sift through ponds, spy on people from behind bushes—all without consent, a warrant, or any meaningful limits on their power. This decision confirms that granting state officials unfettered power to invade private land is anathema to Tennesseans’ most basic constitutional rights.”
….
TWRA thought that its warrantless searches were legal under the century-old federal “open fields” doctrine. In 1924, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not protect any land beyond the home and its immediately surrounding area. The Court reaffirmed the doctrine in 1984 when it held that property owners have no “reasonable expectation of privacy” on any land the Court deems to be an “open field”—a broad category that, according to a new IJ study, includes about 96% of all land nationwide and at least 92% of land in Tennessee specifically.
For people like you and I , with our particular interests and ideals, the notion of privacy and property rights are of heightened importance. If I’m berming a conex full of guns and food on my forty acres somewhere, the last thing I need is some state agency roaming the acreage without my permission….laying cameras and ground sensors, taking pictures, observing, etc. And, to my way of thinking, that applies to drone surveillance as well. I don’t really expect any sense of privacy from a low earth orbit satellite, but I do expect privacy 80 feet above my house.
I have a similar feeling towards the seemingly common practice of law enforcement slapping tracking devices on vehicles without a warrant. You modify my property with a surveillance device, you better have some paperwork about it or we’re going to have some words in a courtroom.
I applaud the Tennessee court for applying what seems to me as common sense in their decision.
There is a lawyer on YouTube who seems pretty sharp who has been covering this case named Steve Lehto. (good channel by the way) According to him, the decision only covers Tennessee and only because their constitution mentions it. For the rest of us outside of Tennessee, it is perfectly legal for government agents to roam our property.
Backhoes are such handy gardening tools.
💪🎯😉
And bagged lime
Wonder what would happen to a tracker that, say, got found and mailed to Guam?
Anonymously, of course, since there would be no indication of the owner thereof.
Don’t be silly.
You don’t mail trackers. Not least of which because it creates a paper trail (all packages entering the postal system are photographed, in case you weren’t aware.)
You affix them to sea containers either at a port, or on passing trains, or apply them to interstate busses.
Let the idiots who lost them follow them all they want.
Tossed into the back of a dump truck works too (ask me how I know).
I’ve heard of a few that got fitted to instates busses.
💪🎯😉
There are many inexpensive devices sold online and at a ‘spy shop’ in town, that will detect any electronic intrusion placed on your property.
About fucking time. BUT and its a big BUT when you beat.gov on anything. Now he will magically start getting other State level agencies filing all kinds of harassment/charges: tax evasion, environmental violations, domestic/child abuse complaints from schools or anonymous calls to .gov, swatting calls, his employer will now get problems if they do govt contracts unless he get fired for cause or if he owns a business god help him. The list will go on forever or until they get him.
I have seen this before with a friend back east.
The process is the punishment.
you can beat the rap but you can’t beat the ride.
The Open Fields Doctrine needs to die. Along with several other court decisions that give the LEOs permission to violate our rights.
I’ve got my little slices of heaven fenced – even if it’s one strand of wire. Marked at twice the rate the law requires.
And game cameras. I was getting some people trespassing a few years ago, poaching game. I’d be out with the dogs and discover gut piles. I INVITED the fish and fur cops, they set up game cameras and a stakeout and caught the criminals.
Poaching, like littering, is a crime against nature.
Hmm, Abandoned property, Sell the devices to the highest bidder. Make certain there are no visible markings on it,
Cops: We want our tracker/trail cam returned
Me: Wat? you installed a device on private property?
Cops: Yeah, and we want it back.
Me: Don’t know anything about it, I don’t recall smashing it with a hammer and putting it in McDonald’s dumpster with some dog waste. If you suspect me of a crime then get an indictment and I’ll see you in court, otherwise I have nothing to say to you and request an attorney.
https://jalopnik.com/best-of-2021-woman-catches-louisiana-state-police-atta-1846738167
I like the railcar idea
For bonus points, after it’s attached, spray paint the outside to match the car.
If you’re really lucky, it gets cross-loaded into the stack onto a container ship, then the hilarity starts.
To me, this decision is a no brainer – I’m surprised they weren’t already covered by other court decisions requiring warrants to enter private property.
Next issue: in many states , maybe all, the county assessor claims the right to enter private property to appraise it and threatens fines if you interfere with them.
To me, they are government agents and need a warrant just like cops.
Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again,
We don’t call 911
We have heard tell of 4/0 treble hooks being tied up in brushy areas with braided fishing line, like green Spiderwire. When adjusted to a height of say 2-4 feet it will somewhat painfully grab a hold of whatever is trying to travel through the brush by the nether regions.
Related?
https://www.fcc.gov/reports-research/guides/inspection-fact-sheet
“Q: The FCC Agent standing at my door does not have a search warrant, so I don’t have to let him in, right?
A: Wrong. Search warrants are needed for entry involving criminal matters. One of the requirements as a licensee, or non-licensee subject to the Commission’s Rules, is to allow inspection of your radio equipment by FCC personnel. Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection. Even radio stations licensed under a “blanket” rule or approval, such as Citizen’s Band (CB) Radio, are subject to the Commission’s inspection requirement.”
Just one of the reasons I refuse to get a ham/GMRS license, the FCC can claim to have this power even for ‘license by rule’ radio services like CB or MURS but I’m certainly not going to tacitly agree with their interpretation of our 4th amendment rights by getting an individual license. Odd to me that so many licensees in the preparedness and patriot circles seem to have no problem with it though. With the recent SCOTUS Chevron decision maybe this will change, but until then I’m sticking with civil disobedience.
This is a case of agreeing with the terms of licensure. If you didnt have a license, as I interpret this, you could bar entry to the FCC guy. But by signing up for the license, you agreed to the ‘terms of service’ and waived your right to privacy. Same thing for FFLs.
I don’t believe that interpretation is correct. While ham or GMRS services require individual licenses, CB/MURS/FRS which are sometimes called ‘license free’ services are really ‘licensed by rule’ or under ‘blanket’ approval as they mention in their FAQ – and are subject to inspection too. But their inspection powers aren’t limited to typical radio communication equipment either but to things like cordless phones and key fobs too:
“Low-power, non-licensed transmitters are used virtually everywhere. Cordless phones, baby monitors, garage door openers, wireless home security systems, keyless automobile entry systems and hundreds of other types of common electronic equipment rely on such transmitters to function. At any time of day, most people are within a few meters of consumer products that use low-power, non-licensed transmitters.”
https://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet63/oet63rev.pdf
But from their inspection FAQ even users of these low power non-licensed transmitters are subject to inspection without a warrant:
“Q: Well then, if I am a low-power broadcaster and don’t have an FCC license, they need a search warrant, right?
A: Wrong again. The FCC agents have the authority to inspect all radio equipment; even if you do not have a license, the FCC can still inspect your equipment. Section 303(n) of the Act gives the FCC the right to inspect all “stations required to be licensed.” This language covers your low-power radio station. The FCC agents are inspecting the equipment, not searching your house.”.
Not to rant about it in your blog CZ, just a little surprised it isn’t discussed, and challenged, more often.