Today the Supreme Court denied certiorari in a substantive Fourth Amendment case, Huber v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, No. 10-388. There is no dissent, but Justice Alito, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas, fired a warning shot across the bow of officials who seek to extend too far the "limited exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement for searches of businesses in 'closely regulated industries.' "
"In this case, a New Jersey appellate court applied this doctrine to uphold a warrantless search by a state environmental official of Robert and Michelle Huber's backyard." It's a "wetland," you see, and that makes it the equivalent of pawnshop for warrantless searches?
"In this case, a New Jersey appellate court applied this doctrine to uphold a warrantless search by a state environmental official of Robert and Michelle Huber's backyard." It's a "wetland," you see, and that makes it the equivalent of pawnshop for warrantless searches?

Leave a comment