Judge Rules in Favor of Ohio Family in Protection of Fourth Amendment Right Lawsuit

Jeni Horn, Ohio State Editor
GOPUSA News
March 03,2003

Vermilion, OH (GOPUSA News)-- Paul and Linda Walsh, who home educate their children, have settled their case against the Erie County Department of Job and Family Services, 2 caseworkers, and the City of Vermilion, including several police officers. In December 2002 a U.S. district court judge agreed that basic Constitutional rights of the Walsh family were violated in Walsh vs. Erie County Department of Job and Family Services, Case No.3:01CV7588

Erie County social workers attempted to enter the Walsh home without a warrant, in response to an anonymous tip that the children were living in unsafe conditions. When Mr. Walsh asked to see the search warrant, the social service worker told him ''she did not need a warrant and that she could remove the children if the Walshes refused to cooperate.'' When police officers arrived, the Walshes were told that the inspection of the home did not have to be a ''big deal'' and was ''routine.''

After being frisked by attending police officers and threatened with arrest, Mr. Walsh allowed the home to be searched, because he believed [according to court record] that he had no other choice.After searching the house the social workers concluded that there were no significant hazards and Mr. Walsh was not taken into custody.

Paul Walsh had no intention of litigating until about a week after this intrusion happened, he received another call from the same social worker expressing her intent to come out to his house again. He immediately called an attorney and filled out the paperwork to litigate in order to get Erie County Department of Job and Family Services to simply leave his family alone.

The Walshes filed suit against ''the caseworkers, the Erie County Department of Job and Family Services, the Erie County Board of Commissioners, the City of Vermilion, Ohio; and three Vermilion police officers." Defendants contended that certain provisions of the Ohio Administrative Code supercede the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and they were, therefore, immune from its application. They asked the court to throw the case out, but the court refused.

U.S. District Judge James G. Carr clearly pointed out, "Even if the entry could be sustained on the basis of exigent circumstances, the scope of the ensuing search was, in Fourth Amendment terms, a general search, conducted at the whim and controlled solely by the discretion of the defendants. This is precisely the kind of general search, an exploratory rummaging in a person’s belongings that the Framer’s of the Fourth Amendment most strongly opposed."

Judge Carr wrote: "Despite the Defendants' exaggerated view of their powers, the Fourth Amendment applies to them, as it does to all other officers and agents of the state whose requests to enter, however benign or well-intentioned, are met by a closed door. There is...no social worker exception to the strictures of the Fourth Amendment. ...Any agency that expects to send its employees routinely into private homes has a fundamental obligation to ensure that those employees understand the constitutional limits on their authority."

The court stated that because the Walshes refused consent, and because the anonymous complaint did not supply persuasive evidence of an emergency, the caseworkers had no option but to either "leave the [Walshes] alone and in peace" or seek a search warrant. The court further ruled that the police did not have probable cause to detain, frisk, and threaten to arrest Walsh, since he was not breaking any law but merely asserting his “fundamental right to be left alone.”

The Walshes' case illustrates how important it is that all families understand that Fourth Amendment freedoms can and should be safeguarded. The Fourth Amendment of the U S Constitution was adopted by the convention of states on September 17, 1787. The Fourth Amendment guarantees that ''the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The Walshes' experience should serve as a reminder to us all. If ever approached by anyone from social services, keep in mind that regardless of what they say, most of them are certainly not there to "help" you. They may appear "nice" and "helpful," but never lose sight of the fact that most of these individuals usually "believe" the anonymous allegations reported against a family.

If a social service representative arrives at your home with an order to investigate, ask to see their search warrant and court order. Call your attorney immediately and read the order to them. If you are unable to reach your attorney, keep the order, or ask for a copy and politely tell the social worker that you will not talk to them without your lawyer being present. You are not required by law to talk to any of these people, so don’t.

Never invite a social service representative into your home. If they have gained entrance before you learn why they are there, ask them to leave. If they do not leave, call the police and request that they be removed for trespassing.

A big thank you goes to Judge Carr for upholding the Constitutional rights of the Walsh family.