MOSTLY GOOD NEWS
Finally, something relatively good out of PA:
The duty of child protective agencies to rescue abused children doesn’t exempt them from the type of standards police must meet to search homes for evidence of crimes, a state appeals court has ruled.
A three-judge panel of state Superior Court decided last week that caseworkers can’t ignore parents’ Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable searches.
…Superior Court said caseworkers requesting court orders to enter homes must show probable cause, the type of standard required of police seeking search warrants.
The court did not say what constitutes probable cause but presumably an unsubstantiated anonymous tip won’t be good enough. Parents can sleep just a bit easier in PA tonight.
BTW, this was a Superior Court ruling. I have no idea if it has any effect outside of western PA.
4 Responses to “MOSTLY GOOD NEWS”
 Comment by Tad May 25th, 2005 at 9:45 am |
Anyone who thinks this “makes family affairs a little more private and children a little less safe,” is in denial. Overworked, undertrained, and overzealous protective social workers cause easily as much harm when they are allowed to ride rough shod over a family as they prevent or end. |
 Comment by maryalice May 25th, 2005 at 3:08 pm |
This is a big win for Jim Mason (HSLDA) and PA. All 3 of the judges agreed, no split decision. The case will set precedence, controlling authority over lower courts in that district and at least persuasive in the other 2 appellate districts. Even in the judicial system, where you expect that they (judges) understand the 4th amendment, it is sometimes a revelation to them that the 4th amendment applies to social workers. Unfortunately, there is still a chance for appeal. But I’m feeling more secure in PA. I hate cautioning my kids for the “knock on the door.” More than “mostly good news”. |
|
Comment by maryalice May 25th, 2005 at 3:10 pm |
This is a big win for Jim Mason (HSLDA) and PA. All 3 of the judges agreed, no split decision. The case will set precedence, controlling authority over lower courts in that district and at least persuasive in the other 2 appellate districts. Even in the judicial system, where you expect that they (judges) understand the 4th amendment, it is sometimes a revelation to them that the 4th amendment applies to social workers. Unfortunately, there is still a chance for appeal. But I’m feeling more secure in PA. I hate cautioning my kids for the “knock on the door.” More than “mostly good news”. |
 Comment by Chris May 25th, 2005 at 5:38 pm |
The problem however, is that many social workers have never heard of the 4th amendment, will never hear about this court case, and will never receive the training required to explain the law to them. So although the case will make it relatively certain that the HS’ers will ultimately win, I predict in the sort term is has no noticeable effect on the behavior of social workers in PA. |