Health Inspector

Incident in Indiana where a health inspector trespasses on private property while law enforcement looks on.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Health
• Inspector
• Liberty
• Law
• Tyranny
• Sheriff
• Indiana
• Property
• Rights
• Martial
• Freedom

[DavidForthoffer]

@AudiRS4Life: No. It was more complicated than that. It was that SOMETIMES Katz was used to resolve questions concerning trespass, along with the previous criteria.

Now, the Katz test alone may be used.

Feel free to read both Jones and Orin Kerr's other commentaries on Jones.

[AudiRS4Life]

@DavidForthoffer said: 'the new part is the "OR"'...was it an "AND" before?

[DavidForthoffer]

@AudiRS4Life: Nevertheless, I'll comment on The Moral Liberal's scenario.

It is a pretty slim argument that the officer conducted an unlawful search, because (a) the student abandoning the papers vitiates any trespassory interest, or (b) the officer may not have any intent to obtain information, or (c) riling through the papers could easily be regarded as "reasonable" and hence legal, despite possibly being a search.

[DavidForthoffer]

@AudiRS4Life: When I said "The NEW part ... is the "OR"", I meant that the new part is the "OR" in your quote of Orin Kerr, not that Katz is new.

Instead of quoting people who are commenting ABOUT Jones, how about you quote Jones directly? That seems far more meaningful than me interpreting other people's opinions of Jones for you.

[AudiRS4Life]

@DavidForthoffer “if a student at a public university leaves a stack of papers in the library, he or she likely has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" as to those papers under either prong of the Katz test”

“But if a campus security officer who has been monitoring the student rifles through the papers and notes that the tenth page contains records of drug sales, that officer may have trespassed and thus, under Jones, has arguably conducted an unlawful search for Fourth Amendment purposes.”

[AudiRS4Life]

@DavidForthoffer

“Where there is no search, there is no Fourth Amendment question, and no need for a warrant”

“The traditional Fourth Amendment / trespass nexus gave way to an overriding concern with the Katz test.”

“Under Justice Scalia’s RECENT MAJORITY opinion, "trespass" by government actors … also count as "searches" when undertaken for "the purpose of obtaining information," and therefore also implicate the Fourth Amendment.”

Are you suggesting Katz v. US, 389 U.S. 347 is new?

[DavidForthoffer]

@AudiRS4Life: Trespass by a public official is not a new PART of a 4th Amendment "search". And you forgot to mention that it only applies to "persons, houses, papers, and effects".

The NEW part (as interpreted by Orin Kerr) is the "OR".

[AudiRS4Life]

@DavidForthoffer says: "she did not infringe on areas protected by the 4th", which is your opinion...I'm ok with that...I do not agree...neither do the great majority...the property is too close to the primary structure, not to mention the drive and all other areas she trespassed across to perform warrantless search...it is self-evident and all common sense points to "curtilage"

Now, the new doctrine is very important, it EXPLICITILY details the TRESPASS by SERVANT as a SEARCH

[DavidForthoffer]

@AudiRS4Life: You left out the context of Orin Kerr's doctrine—an audience of legal scholars who KNEW that the Katz test only applies to areas protected by the Fourth Amendment ("persons, houses, papers, and effects"). Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court goes on to say, "Katz did not repudiate that understanding" in United States v. Jones (2012).

In other words, since she did not infringe on areas protected by the 4th, this new doctrine is irrelevant to this video.

[AudiRS4Life]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Doctrine for 4th amendment “search”:

A search occurs either when

(a) A trespassory test is satisfied: (1) a “trespass” occurs, (2) the trespass is onto an enumerated item listed in the Fourth Amendment (“persons, houses, papers, or effects”), and (3) it occurs with the intent “to find something or to obtain information”

OR

(b) The Katz test is satisfied: the government conduct violates a subjective expectation of privacy and an objective reasonable expectation of privacy