Columbus, OH – On Monday, The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Johnson v. Smith, calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to stop the government from conducting warrantless searches of Americans’ homes and businesses. 

“Our Founding Fathers were well aware of the risks inherent in warrantless and unreasonable government searches of private homes and businesses and enshrined clear and strong protections against this type of government intrusion in the U.S. Constitution,” said David C. Tryon, director of litigation at The Buckeye Institute. “Ever since then, governments at all levels have tried to expand their power to search our private property. In Johnson v. Smith, the court has another opportunity to tell government officials that they cannot create Fourth Amendment-free zones through oppressive regulatory schemes.”

In Johnson v. Smith—a Kansas Justice Institute case—Kansas government officials argue that they can conduct surprise warrantless searches of the Johnson’s homestead just because Scott Johnson has a dog training kennel license. If no one is home for the warrantless and unannounced search, the Johnsons are fined $200. If, on the government’s third attempt to conduct an unannounced search, no one is home, Mr. Johnson’s license can be revoked—all because no one was home and could not get home in 30 minutes. In its brief, The Buckeye Institute argues that searches of private property without a warrant or the owner’s consent are unreasonable and unconstitutional.

# # #

UPDATE: On June 10, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled that the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas improperly dismissed Mr. Johnson’s claim that warrantless inspections are unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment and returned the case to the district court to determine if the facts show a violation of Mr. Johnson’s Fourth Amendment rights.