• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Broad Searches

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Economic Unit

Junior Member
What is the name of your state? Tx

I work for the State Prison system as a contract employee in the medical field. Originally I only worked within the prison system, but certain areas within the prison were acquired by outside agencies and subsequently contracted out. Contraban occasionally finds its way into the prison. The prison deals with this problem by conducting 'surprise' early morning searches as workers are entering the parking area. Once a worker turns into the parking lot, s/he is not allowed to leave. They remain in line and each vehicle is searched by security guards and drug dogs. It is certainly a discomforting feeling to see someone search through personal belongings in the glove box, trunk, interior, etc. and have a dog walk through the vehicle. At first, a sign was clearly posted at the entrance of the gate that goes into the prison that stated 'all persons entering in are subject to search...'. Later, a sign was posted at the entrance into the parking lot. During these surprise searches, two or three city or county police cars are also on the property, however, I don't believe they participate in the actual search. Doesn't Federal law protect even State workers against unlawful search and seizure? Wouldn't a search warrant still be required naming 'who' is to be searched, and 'where' the search will take place?
 


S

seniorjudge

Guest
Q: Doesn't Federal law protect even State workers against unlawful search and seizure?
A: Yes. But your question does not indicate that any unlawful searches or seizures have taken place.

Q: Wouldn't a search warrant still be required naming 'who' is to be searched, and 'where' the search will take place?
A: No; you have been notified that as a condition of coming on the premises, you may be searched.

Replace "airport" with "prison" in your post.
 

Economic Unit

Junior Member
Thank you for your reply. I appreciate the response. Just a thought, however. If I replace 'airport' with 'my home', and put a sign up outside my driveway. Do I then have permission to search anyone who comes on my property?
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
Q: If I replace 'airport' with 'my home', and put a sign up outside my driveway. Do I then have permission to search anyone who comes on my property?

A: Yes, you are not the government.
 

Economic Unit

Junior Member
Again, thanks for the reply. I don't understand the last one, but thanks anyway. While you are still here, however, I hope you bear with me on one other point. Mind you, I have not been fired. But like I said in the original post, it is very disturbing to watch someone go through personal belongings while they are literally given complete authority to search my vehicle. For someone who has never experienced this, it turns the stomach. During the last search, I wanted to simply turn around and leave rather than go through this again. However, other vehicles in line that were trying to leave were forced to stay in line and continue on. Shouldn't I at least have the option to leave for the day if I disagree with the action?
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
Q: I don't understand the last one, but thanks anyway.
A: You are not the government. The restrictions in the Fourth Amendment apply only to the federal and state government. If you want to search someone coming on your private property, have at it. Nightclubs do it all the time.

Q: But like I said in the original post, it is very disturbing to watch someone go through personal belongings while they are literally given complete authority to search my vehicle. For someone who has never experienced this, it turns the stomach. During the last search, I wanted to simply turn around and leave rather than go through this again. However, other vehicles in line that were trying to leave were forced to stay in line and continue on.
A: Haven't you flown lately? If this bothers you, I suggest that you never fly to a foreign country. Our airport security here is a joke; in Europe, Mexico, Canada, etc., it is much more rigorous.

If this turns your stomach you would not have been very happy to have been searched at Uzi-point by the French National Police on a train as I was.

It didn't bother me since I had nothing to hide.

Q: Shouldn't I at least have the option to leave for the day if I disagree with the action?
A: Absolutely not. Your option is to work there or quit and get another job. I know lots of prison guards and workers; you are the first one I have talked to who has your attitude. Astounding!


But you have been polite. Thanks for that.
 

Economic Unit

Junior Member
Actually, I thought I had a good attitude. Perhaps a different belief system. I also have nothing to hide, but believe I have a right (not privilege) to be secure in my person and possessions. I believe my rights are not given to me by the state. If they were, they could be taken away by the state. I would still adhere to this belief if I worked anywhere else. I listened to an argument several months ago between two people who were talking about a similar incident. One replied "What are you afraid of, do you have something to hide?" The other person responded, "That is the same thing they say in Cuba or Russia. But this is the United States". By the way, I have traveled abroad and am well aware of what it is like to visit a country where I really did feel like I had no rights. It is not fun.
I also realize that attorneys have different belief systems. I am sure that I could find more than one who would not agree entirely with what you have posted. This is why courtrooms can sometimes become so volatile.
Nonetheless, as I said before, I really appreciate your responses. Your information has broadened my understanding of the issue. Thank you.
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
Economic Unit said:
Actually, I thought I had a good attitude. Perhaps a different belief system. I also have nothing to hide, but believe I have a right (not privilege) to be secure in my person and possessions. I believe my rights are not given to me by the state. If they were, they could be taken away by the state. I would still adhere to this belief if I worked anywhere else. I listened to an argument several months ago between two people who were talking about a similar incident. One replied "What are you afraid of, do you have something to hide?" The other person responded, "That is the same thing they say in Cuba or Russia. But this is the United States". By the way, I have traveled abroad and am well aware of what it is like to visit a country where I really did feel like I had no rights. It is not fun.
I also realize that attorneys have different belief systems. I am sure that I could find more than one who would not agree entirely with what you have posted. This is why courtrooms can sometimes become so volatile.
Nonetheless, as I said before, I really appreciate your responses. Your information has broadened my understanding of the issue. Thank you.

You are welcome.

If you have read any of my other posts about the Fourth Amendment and government intrusion in general, I am exceptionally suspicious of any heavy-handed government actions. I think every search without a warrant is suspect.

And we do agree on the fact that our rights do not come from the government. Government exists because it has taken away some of our rights in return for security, etc.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top