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:
This is what happens when socialism comes to town keep voting Democrat you idiots.
Michael your wrong on this one . Any time you buy property ,weather you live in it or rent it out you have to get an occupancy inspection if you decide to rent it out you shouldn’t have to get an occupancy inspection every time somebody moves in and out that is just bs.
That 458th amendment is so out of date anyway. It was for a time before the present officials were born and wanted to trample down the people.
You shouldn’t have to be Licensed to rent out property. What two adults agree to Do with a building is there a business and not the government’s.
Umm, not really. All property in a city is subject to an annual inspection. Especially if it is rental property.
I take the city fire marshall thru every apartment once a year.
Read up on NFPA recommendations and city codes.
And if it is a duplex, both units fall under jurisdiction.
The government has found ways around our privacy laws and will continue to get worse . They will continue to harass people they choose using excuses and made up reasons to invade . THE LAW needs to protect people from having there privacy invaded or being harassed . If you disagree with and don’t conform to what they want they will make your life hell. This should be considered harassment and should not be allowed .
Ok as I read through twice. The inspectors wanted to inspect their duplex (meaning another family lives on the other side of an adjoining wall) to see about renewing their rental license. Do they own the duplex and rent out the other side? If they do then it would make sense to inspect both parts of the building to ensure safe housing conditions. The couple said no because of strange people walking through their home. OK. Understandable. I understand a person’s right to privacy, entering homes for reason etc. Have no issue upholding the Constitution as it is but when you are a landlord and the property you rent is attached to your home then it just makes sense to set a date to allow the inspectors into your home to make sure the whole building is safe for the people renting.
B******t …. Unless the city owns the property ,$#%&!@*them !
Crazy how landlords pull this c**p all the time!!!
4th Amendment, End of discussion.