The gall of some government officials astounds me.
Paul and Linda Walsh filed a lawsuit after police and caseworkers entered their home without a warrant and without permission. The social workers said they were acting on an anonymous tip about unspecified “hazards” in the home, and claimed they had a right to enter the home without a warrant.The social workers threatened the family, saying that if they were not allowed in the home they would take the children away from the parents. In papers filed with the court, the Walshes said that a social worker even blocked their driveway with her car when the family tried to leave to attend a church function that evening.
The social worker summoned police, who frisked Mr. Walsh and threatened to arrest him on charges of obstructing official business if he did not allow the caseworkers into the home. Walsh said that he then allowed the workers to enter the home rather than risk being jailed.
The caseworkers found nothing in the home that constituted an immediate hazard to the family.
Fortunately the Walshes were not from France. They filed suit against “the caseworkers, the Erie County Department of Job and Family Services, the Erie County Board of Commissioners, the City of Vermilion, Ohio; and three Vermilion police officers.”
Defendants told the court that the Fourth Amendment prohibitions against illegal searches and seizures do not apply to them in such circumstances. They asked the court to throw the case out, but the court refused.In a forceful opinion, US District Judge James G. Carr wrote: “Despite the Defendants’ exaggerated view of their powers, the Fourth Amendment applies to them, as it does to all other officers and agents of the state whose requests to enter, however benign or well-intentioned, are met by a closed door. There is...no social worker exception to the strictures of the Fourth Amendment. ...Any agency that expects to send its employees routinely into private homes has a fundamental obligation to ensure that those employees understand the constitutional limits on their authority.”
The court stated that because the Walshes refused consent, and because the anonymous complaint did not supply persuasive evidence of an emergency, the caseworkers had no option but to either “leave the [Walshes] alone and in peace” or seek a search warrant.
The court further ruled that the police did not have probable cause to detain, frisk, and threaten to arrest Walsh, since he was not breaking any law but merely asserting his “fundamental right to be left alone.”
Thank God for a judge that enforces the Constitution. This is why I support judges that believe their job is to implement the law instead of creating the law.