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:
Unconstitutional, 4th Amendment!
This world doesn’t abide by laws anymore. Its going bezerk!
p**s on the city…government needs to be removed that does such
Tell them to$#%&!@*off, they tried the excuse on me that they were doing a safety check and I met the vop in my hallway with my gun, he didn’t identity hisself and said my door was open as he walked backwards out the door into the yard where there were two more cops, we had a talk and they left, never heard from them again.
I see a lot of dead cops in the future if this stands!
No freedom anymore, authorities just walk in. Sounds likes the SovietUnion.
As long as they sell a service that the city regulates, they must abide by the city regulations. They can stop renting and the problem goes away. All rental properties are subject to inspections.
Stand strong..Hope the courts rule favorably in the couple’s favor!
If a city ordinance requiring a occupancy certificate exists it is granted before it is occupied. After that the authorities can go poud sand
The solution is simple. Their licence to rent their property should be withheld until the landlords allow the city to conduct a safety and suitability inspection. The city is not depriving a homeowner of their right to privacy. They are trying to inspect the premises to determine if they’re suitable and safe to rent out.
You people make me laugh. On the one hand you’re complaining about slum lord properties, and on the other hand you’re supporting this landlord’s refusal to have the rental property inspected. You’re all being ridiculous. Read the article before you comment.
Actually the solution is simpler.
The couple should not have to have a license to rent.
It is their property and they should be able to do what ever they wish to do with it.