Resources
Guides, features, and FAQs to help Michigan property owners protect their rights against warrantless government entry.
A Practical Guide for Michigan Property Owners
What To Do When a Government Inspector Demands Entry
It happens more often than most people realize. A township, county, or health department inspector appears at your door, clipboard in hand, asking to “take a quick look.” The request may sound harmless, even routine. But for Michigan property owners, this moment carries serious constitutional weight. What you do next determines whether your right to privacy remains intact — or quietly slips away.
The first rule is simple: stay calm and keep the door closed. You are under no legal obligation to let a government official onto your property without a warrant or your clear consent. Both the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 11 of the Michigan Constitution shield you from warrantless searches. You may choose to step outside to speak, but there is no reason to invite them in. Courtesy is wise; compliance is not required.
Always ask for identification. Write down the inspector’s name, agency, and the stated purpose of the visit. If possible, photograph their badge or business card. Transparency runs both ways. You have every right to know who is standing at your door and why.
Then comes the most important question: “Do you have a warrant?” If the inspector does, ask to see it. A valid warrant must be signed by a judge, specifically describe your property, and state the scope of what is being inspected. If no warrant exists, you have every right—legally and morally—to say, “I do not consent to any inspection or entry.” That single sentence draws a bright constitutional line.
Do not argue or obstruct. Politely refusing consent is not the same as interference. Michigan courts recognize that asserting your rights cannot be punished. Let the official leave. You can follow up later in writing, noting the date, time, and agency involved. A short email confirming that you declined entry pending a valid warrant creates a clear record and discourages future pressure.
Finally, contact an attorney familiar with Michigan property-rights and Fourth Amendment law. An experienced lawyer can determine whether the inspector’s demand crossed the constitutional line and, if so, preserve your remedies—injunctions, suppression of evidence, or even civil-rights damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The principle is timeless: your home and land are your private domain. Government must play by the same rules it enforces. When a government inspector demands entry, the right answer is firm but peaceful. Say no. Stand steady. The Constitution stands with you.
Featured
Mockridge v. Harvey – Explained
In Mockridge v. Harvey, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit delivered a decisive Fourth Amendment victory for Michigan property owners — one secured by attorney Philip L. Ellison, widely regarded as the state’s leading advocate against warrantless Fourth Amendment administrative inspections.
The case arose when county and township officials, without consent or warrant, entered the Mockeridge’s private property to inspect several small cabins, photographing and measuring structures for alleged zoning violations. The officials claimed they were simply conducting a code-enforcement “site visit.” This however was not benign regulation but a physical trespass into the curtilage — the protected area surrounding one’s home—expressly forbidden by the Fourth Amendment absent judicial authorization.
Both the district court and the Sixth Circuit agreed. Writing for the panel, the federal appeals court held that when government agents step onto private residential property to gather evidence or conduct inspections without a warrant or permission, they conduct a search under the Constitution’s property-based framework. The so-called “administrative” nature of the entry did not excuse the intrusion. As emphasized in briefing and argument, “no code or ordinance can override the Constitution’s warrant requirement.”
Rejecting the officials’ plea for qualified immunity, the Sixth Circuit ruled that the right to be free from such warrantless intrusions was clearly established long before the inspection occurred. The court cited prior Sixth Circuit precedent recognizing that even brief, investigative incursions into private curtilage are unconstitutional.
The victory not only preserved the claims for damages but also set a powerful precedent for property owners across the Midwest. The opinion makes clear that inspectors—whether zoning officers, health agents, or environmental regulators—must secure a warrant or consent before entering private land to gather evidence. As a result, Mockridge v. Harvey now stands as one of the most consequential modern affirmations that “No Warrant, No Entry” is not a slogan but a constitutional command.
The ruling cements Philip Ellison’s role at the forefront of modern Fourth Amendment inspection law, continuing the line of landmark property-rights victories.
Read the Decision →
General Help and Advice
Frequently Asked Questions
Michigan and constitutional law is complex and continually evolving with court decisions. Because each situation is unique, these explanations may not fully capture the specific legal requirements or risks that apply in your circumstances. For that reason, you should always consult directly with an experienced attorney.
1. What does the Fourth Amendment protect?
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals and property owners against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It requires warrants supported by probable cause—unless a recognized exception applies.
2. Do government inspectors need a warrant to enter private property?
Yes, generally. Building, zoning, or code-enforcement inspectors cannot lawfully enter private property to inspect or photograph without consent, a valid warrant, or exigent circumstances.
3. What qualifies as a “search” under the Fourth Amendment?
A search occurs when a government agent intrudes upon a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy—such as entering fenced land, peering into structures, or using technology to view areas not visible from public vantage points.
4. Does the Fourth Amendment apply to administrative or civil inspections?
Yes. Even so-called “administrative” inspections—those not part of a criminal investigation—must comply with the Fourth Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court made this clear in Camara v. Municipal Court (1967).
5. What is an administrative inspection warrant?
An administrative warrant is a judicial order authorizing a government official to inspect property for code, zoning, or regulatory compliance. Unlike a criminal warrant, it can be based on neutral administrative standards rather than probable cause of crime.
6. What if an inspector claims “we don’t need a warrant” for safety reasons?
Only in emergencies or genuine exigent circumstances—such as fire, gas leak, or imminent danger—may the government bypass the warrant requirement. Routine or convenience-based inspections don’t qualify.
7. Can a property owner refuse entry to an inspector without a warrant?
Absolutely. Property owners have the right to politely but firmly deny entry to any inspector lacking a valid warrant or consent. Refusal alone cannot be treated as a violation.
8. What happens if an inspector enters anyway?
If an inspector enters without consent or a warrant, any evidence gathered may be suppressed, and the official or municipality may face civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating constitutional rights.
9. Are photographs taken during warrantless inspections admissible in court?
Usually not. Photographs or observations obtained from unlawful entries may be excluded as “fruit of the poisonous tree.”
10. Can inspectors look over a fence or fly a drone to inspect my land?
If the area is within your “curtilage” (the immediate area around a home), such acts may constitute an unconstitutional search. Aerial or drone surveillance also raises serious Fourth Amendment concerns, especially if used for targeted inspection.
11. What if my property is visible from the road or public space?
The Fourth Amendment protects only what is not exposed to public view. If a violation is plainly visible from a lawful vantage point—like a junk pile seen from a public street—inspectors may note it without entering.
12. How do I know if a warrant is valid?
A legitimate warrant will be signed by a judge or magistrate; describe the property and scope of inspection; identify the agency and purpose; and be executed within the authorized timeframe.
13. What if the inspector threatens to fine or arrest me for refusing entry?
Such threats may themselves constitute a constitutional violation. The government cannot penalize citizens for asserting their Fourth Amendment rights.
14. Can I record the inspector?
Yes. In Michigan and most jurisdictions, you may lawfully record government officials performing duties on or near your property, as long as you do not interfere with their work.
15. Does it matter if it’s a health, zoning, or environmental inspector?
No. The Fourth Amendment applies to all government actors—whether police, fire marshal, township zoning officer, or environmental regulator.
16. Are there special rules for businesses or rental properties?
Yes. Certain regulated industries (like liquor, firearms, or mining) are subject to more frequent inspections. However, even landlords and business owners retain core Fourth Amendment protections against arbitrary entry.
17. What should I do if inspectors arrive unannounced?
Remain calm, do not voluntarily grant entry, and ask for identification. Request to see a warrant. If none exists, politely decline and contact an attorney experienced in Fourth Amendment inspection law.
18. Can municipalities pass ordinances that override the Fourth Amendment?
No. Local ordinances and state statutes cannot nullify constitutional rights. Any law purporting to authorize warrantless searches of private property is subject to constitutional challenge.
19. How can a property owner enforce Fourth Amendment rights?
You may file a civil-rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages, declaratory relief, or injunctions against future warrantless inspections. Successful plaintiffs may also recover attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
The information provided here is general in nature and is intended for educational purposes only.
Was Your Property Inspected Without a Warrant?
You may be entitled to damages or injunctive relief. Tell us what happened.
Case Review