Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

[ryandrake]

> Stephanie heard someone loudly knocking on the front door of the cottage. The individual then went around the side of the house, past no-trespassing signs, entered the back yard, walked onto the back porch, and began “pounding” on the back door.

As someone who grew up in rural PA, this is a pretty straightforward way to get shot as a trespasser.

[0xEF]

Former Detroiter, here. That's a good way to get shot in an urban environment, too. Finally, something the two residential categories have in common!

[svieira]

> Beyond his main vocation as a chimney business owner, Thomas often drove for Lyft and Uber. After the criminal citation was filed, he automatically lost both driving jobs—banned by both companies due to the legal violation.

For being found guilty (overturned on appeal) of fishing with more than 8 lines due to what is likely a vendetta on the part of the officer. A particularly succinct example of automated cruelty. But what can one do?

[ryandrake]

Unfortunately, you can be denied employment for all sorts of unfair and ridiculous reasons--or for no reason at all. Not too much can be done without changing the law. I remember filling out a job application some time ago where one of the questions was "Have you ever been charged with a crime?" Not "convicted of". It wasn't a mistake, either. There was a footnote that said "You must answer YES to this question even if the charge was dismissed or you were found not guilty in court."

[giancarlostoro]

Here I was wondering why Florida's adding that (Fishing and Hunting as right) as a constitutional amendment for the state, guess that answers that.

[gs17]

IJ has a few similar cases: https://ij.org/issues/ijs-project-on-the-4th-amendment/open-... The idea that state officials can trespass on your land and plant cameras (or steal yours) without even a suspicion of a crime is absurd, even if just for how much danger it puts the state employees in.

[Joker_vD]

I imagine the state sees the land as their property, which private individuals don't, strictly speaking, own but merely hold infinite lease on (land tax = rent price, eminent domain = one-side lease termination with compensation, etc). This legal philosophy arguably makes some theoretical sense but has rather unpalatable practical consequences.

[ddgflorida]

I hope the landowner wins his case. Wildlife officers need to follow the Constitution.

[0xEF]

I'm not getting the impression from the article that wildlife officers, a whole group of people, are running roughshod over the US Constitution.

[dmitrygr]

> According to 12 words of Pennsylvania state code, PFBC officials have authority to “enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties.” The statue provides wide latitude for PFBC to enter onto any property without consent, probable cause, or warrant—with no limits on duration, frequency, or scope.

Say what? That is how you get shot in rural america, as you should...

[gs17]

A similar case in VA had the state official sneak in wearing camouflage and steal the person's property: https://ij.org/case/virginia-open-fields/ I really have to wonder how it would be ruled if he had ran out with a gun and shot at the thief.

[Suppafly]

Not to mention that states can't just agree to give their employees more rights than what the constitution allows.

[johnea]

Well, that's sure some consequential news there.

I'm sure we'll see more important fishing license violation, constitutional law articles, here on ycombinator in the near future...

I guess this is all they have to worry about out in lake side Pennsylvania...

[superkuh]

The public figure conservation officer with the implied vendetta can be viewed on page 47/52 of this pdf https://www.fishandboat.com/About-Us/Angler-and-Boater/Legac... . It is a public document showing a public function where he received an award. The PDF is available on a government website and intentionally published for and accessible by the public.

[loeg]

To what end?

[colechristensen]

There is no reason any of us need to see this.

[crooked-v]

I'm badly split on Institute for Justice, the nonprofit backing this suit.

On the one hand, they aggressively advocate for obvious constitutional rights cases like this one and have put a lot of effort into fighting legally-accepted-yet-fundamentally-nonsensical practices like civil forfeiture.

On the other, they also aggressively support school vouchers, which are mostly a scheme to drain money from public schools into private ones that can use broad excuses to keep out students that would cost more or lower their grade averages.

[JumpCrisscross]

It’s almost like democracy involves coalition building and compromise, where absolute positions are anathema.

[gs17]

I'm willing to accept that the 90% of what they do that's things I really really agree with comes with some things I don't like as much. They're willing to take on cases like https://ij.org/case/florida-cultivated-meat-ban/ too.

[Suppafly]

I'm not a fan of vouchers in general, especially if they allow public funds to go to religious institutions, but educational choice (as IJ terms it) is a tricky area. A lot of times these programs allow people to move between public schools or get additional funds for alternative programs that better suit their children's needs.

[crisdux]

In communities near me, recent expansions of school vouchers has been a game changer. Public schools are struggling and private schools give students a much better education. Public schools were failing well before private school vouchers existed.

[busterarm]

So you're saying you don't want parents to have the choice to send their children to better performing schools and provide better opportunities for their children?

Or are you saying that should only be a privilege of the rich?

Having gone to both public and private schools, while I had horrible experiences with both, at least there was teaching going on in my private schools.

My public school experience was horrific, even in NYC's so-called "gifted" schools. My brother's kid only went to NYC public schools and her experiences were so much worse. My public school tried to have me put on psychiatric medication without a diagnosis from a qualified professional and my niece's public school spent two years trying to gaslight her that she was not gay but trans (as well as a whole bunch targeted harassment from her teachers for being vocally politically conservative).

Neither of those things have anything to do with what the schools' mandate should be: education.

[s1artibartfast]

Im a huge fan of constitutional rights and school vouchers, so I should look into them.

If public schools are less desirable, we should celebrate that the money is going elsewhere.

[mistrial9]

both "illegal search on private lands" and "illegal control by private groups over public lands" are going on in the continental US West.. what is said in public does not always match what is done each day.

[riskable]

I'm torn on this one: Should law enforcement need a warrant to search your property? Certainly. Seems obvious, right? Except this is a "conservation officer" who has been granted certain rights (by the state of PA) to:

    Enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties.

See: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?...

If they couldn't move between properties along shorelines they'd have a hell of a time doing their actual job. Any criminal could fish illegally on private property then flee when a they see a conservation officer approaching in a boat. They'd never catch anyone who fishes along a shore.

This lawsuit seems like a nuclear weapon being thrown at an overly zealous individual who possibly has some sort of personal vendetta against the property owner.

[gs17]

> (by the state of PA)

The Fourth Amendment is a level above that, fortunately.

[recursivedoubts]

The fourth amendment is more important than catching people illegally fishing.

[Suppafly]

Moving along a shoreline is different from trespassing on the curtilage of someone's home.

[devmor]

You are torn on whether or not a state agent should be able to supercede constitutionally-granted inalienable rights because it may impede their duty?

[gjsman-1000]

What an objection. My state, until recently, gave officers the on-paper ability to arrest and charge anyone guilty of adultery with a misdemeanor. I doubt you would have appreciated the investigation or enforcement of that statute - or many others still on the books.