A major decision that will impact Minnesotans’ privacy rights is waiting to be heard in the state’s court of Appeals.
It all started off simply enough. Jason and Jackie Wiebesick were a Golden Valley couple who lived in a duplex. One day, officials from the city approached them to ask permission to inspect their home. The stated reason was to collect information so as to make a decision over whether to renew the Wiebesick’s rental license.
Disturbed by the prospect of unfamiliar people walking around their home, the Wiebesick’s turned down the inspectors’ request. One might think it would have ended there, but the city saw to it that it didn’t.
Taking the case to court, Golden Valley authorities implored a county judge to issue a warrant overriding the Wiebesick’s objections and allowing them into the house. Tellingly, the judge refused their request for a warrant, prompting the city to reach even higher.
See video about the case on the next page:
ted search means they must have a good reason to search.
I’d say demand all you want, get a warrant, and you better be able to justify it, if not, that’s your ass
No
If we let them do it once. What stop them from coming a takeing(seizsing) what thay want.including your kids.to get loss threw the systems.just saying
I live in a rental. The city posted a notice of intent to inspect. I refused others on my street also refused, some did not. This is not my landlord asking but the city.
If under same ownership, yes.
This is nothing, see what happens if Trump is elected. He sees no value in private property especially if it is not his property.
They better have a warrant if they come to my house
City can go &@$ themselves.
Nope