[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Federal Appeals Court Says Welfare Applicants' Houses Can Be Searched Without Warrants (09-19) 15:01 PDT San Francisco (AP) -- San Diego County investigators can search welfare applicants' houses without warrants to prevent fraud and ensure they are eligible for assistance, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday. Welfare advocates unsuccessfully claimed the searches, which include peeking in closets and cabinets, are unconstitutional. Under the program adopted in 1997 to cut down on fraud, unarmed investigators from the district attorney's office arrive unannounced at applicants' houses to verify assets. They also conduct interviews, determine if eligible dependents live there and certify an "absent" parent does not live there. The American Civil Liberties Union sued the county in 2000, claiming the so-called home visits violated the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unlawful searches. Failure to submit to the searches, which can last an hour, disqualifies applicants from assistance. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in upholding a lower court, said the U.S. Supreme Court in 1971 allowed social workers to visit homes in New York to determine eligibility. Using sworn peace officers "does not cause the home visits to rise to the level of a search in the traditional criminal law context," Judge A. Wallace Tashima wrote for the 2-1 panel. The court also cited a 2002 California Supreme Court decision upholding a home visit program in Los Angeles County and said the "underlying purpose of the home visits is to verify eligibility for welfare benefits, and not for general law enforcement purposes." In dissent, however, Judge Raymond Fisher said it was unlawful for an investigator from the district attorney's office to go "walking through the applicant's home in search of physical evidence of ineligibility that could lead to criminal prosecution either for welfare fraud or other crimes unrelated to the welfare application." The case was brought by six single parents in their 20s seeking food stamps, monetary assistance, and job training and placement who said the searches invaded their privacy. David Blair-Loy, the ACLU's legal director in San Diego, said the court "is creating a defacto poverty exemption in the Fourth Amendment." "That's very troubling," he said, adding the ACLU was mulling its next legal move in the case. The county has said it saved millions of dollars under the program. "The theory behind the program is to make sure only people who are eligible for benefits receive them," said Thomas Bunton, a lawyer for the county. The case is Sanchez v. San Diego County, 04-55122. ___ Editors: David Kravets has been covering state and federal courts for more than a decade. URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/09/19/state/n150148D21.DTL
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Brian S (#0)
I see no problem with this, just so long as American citizens have the right to search government buildings and records at any time in order to find cases of government waste of the taxpayer's hard earned dollars.
"The more I see of life, the less I fear death" - Me.
Hastert and his corrupt friends had a terrible time when FBI searched an office of a thief.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||