ARLINGTON, Va.—Today, the Institute for Justice (IJ) submitted an amicus brief in a case before the Ohio Supreme Court, seeking to strike down an ordinance in North Canton that allows city officials to search rental homes without a warrant based on probable cause.  

The North Canton ordinance requires all landlords to register their properties with the city. As part of that registration process, city officials can demand entrance into any rental home to search for code violations. If the landlord or tenant refuses entrance, city code officials can obtain an “administrative” warrant to search the property. Unlike a traditional warrant, where the government has to prove there is probable cause to suspect some sort of crime or violation is taking place, administrative warrants require no evidence of wrongdoing.  

“People who rent their homes deserve the same constitutional rights as those who own their homes,” said IJ Attorney Daniel Woislaw, who wrote the brief. “If government officials are going to search your property, they need a warrant based on probable cause, not a rubber-stamped administrative warrant.”  

In January 2023, CF Homes sent a letter to the city, refusing an inspection at a rental property it owns on N. Main Street, unless the city obtained a warrant. In response, the city applied for an administrative warrant with the Stark County Common Pleas Court in July 2023.  

CF Homes then argued that the city had no reason to suspect the rental units violated any city codes. The Common Pleas Court sided with the city, saying that the ordinance was not unconstitutional, because it has a “clearly defined purpose.” CF Homes appealed that ruling to the Fifth District Court of Appeals, where a three-judge panel upheld the lower court’s ruling. But in June of this year, the Ohio Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.  

In its brief, IJ argues that the use of these administrative warrants clearly violates the Ohio Constitution. The brief explains that the original public meaning of “probable cause” and “unreasonable searches” in Ohio’s Constitution, as they were understood when it was ratified in 1851, clearly prohibit these types of general warrants. “In fact,” said Woislaw, “warrants without cause were one of the principal evils that motivated the states, including Ohio, to adopt constitutional language requiring evidence, submitted under oath, before a judge could issue a suitably restricted warrant.” 

Through its Project on the Fourth Amendment, IJ defeated a similar rental inspection ordinance in Illinois, is currently awaiting a decision about a Pennsylvania law, and won several lower court opinions against an Iowa city’s ordinance before being overturned at the Iowa Supreme Court.