Evening star., 1949-08-01
Warrant Ruled
Necessary for
DC. Inspections
Health OfficersVioIute
Constitutional Rights,
Appeals Court Holds


The United States Court of APP
peals today upheld lower court
ruling that health officers must
get search warrants to make in
spections of private dwellings.
In a dissent to the majority
opinion. Judge Alexander Holtzof
sounded a warning that health
officers and even building and
plumbing inspectors have to
suspend their function of inspec-
ton unless Congress passes
legislation specifically authorizing
search warrants empowering such
inspections.
Judge Holtzof. District Court
Judge sitting by designation on
the appeals bench, added that
even with a statute on the books
to authorize issuance of search
warrants, how can an inspector
make a showing of probable cause
as a basis for the issuance Of q
warrant for the purpose of an Or
dinary. routine inspection?'
District Claim Criticized.
The majority opinion of the
court criticized the Districts claim
that health officers do not need
a search warrant to enter pri-
vate home in the interests of pro-
tecting the health, welfare or
safety" of the public.
A ruling of the Municipal Court
of Appeals several months ago
provided that a warrant was re-
quired in the case of an inspec-
ton.
An official of the corporation
counsel's Office said no such war
rant can be obtained now, how
ever. Warrants are issued only in
criminal cases.
| Readily Permit Inspections.
In most cases, he said. property
owners readily permit inspec-
tions. Todays decision would
mean serious difficulties in the
case of resistance. The only way
to meet the situation. he said.
would be to obtain legislation au-
thorizing issuance of warrants for
inspections.
The official cited several in
stances of legislation in which he
said Congress has shown intent
for such inspections to be made.
without provisions for warrants.
Judge E.-Barrett Prettyman. who
spoke for the majority, described
as not only wholly without merit"
but "preposterous" the Districts
claim that the fourth Constitu-
tional amendment, guaranteeing a
citizens right to privacy in his
own home, applies only in GRIM
inal cases.
The basic premise of the Fourth
amendment prohibition against
searches was the common
law right of a man to privacy in
his home it belonged to all
men. not merely to criminals, real
or suspected" Judge Prettyman
declared.
ITO say that man suspected
Of crime has right to protec-
ton against search of his home,
without a warrant, but that a man
not suspected of crime has no such
protection, is q fantastic absurd
ity," the judge asserted.
Judge Holtzoff pointed out that
regular periodic inspections are
necessary "for securing observance
of safety and health regulation"
Figures released by the District
show that inspections of all kinds
number approximately 10000 a
year.
Would Become Judicial Function.
IF a search warrant we're neces-
sary for such recurring inspections
the requirement would amount to
turning over the supervision Of
administration from the executive
to the judicial branch of the gov
ernment," Judge HoltZof asserted.
He observed that the Supreme
Court has regarded such a trans
fer of authority as "a source Of
mischief and contrary to the phil
osophy of our form of govern
ment."
In effect the opinion of the
court proposes to create new
type of process. unknown to the
common law or to any statute,
and to confer power on the
judiciary, that it has never pos
sessed, to supervise the per-
formance of routine administra-
tive duties" Judge Holtzoff de-
clared.
Arraying court precedent. the
Judge noted that "Mr. Justice
Holmes, in his inimitable man
ner. observed that in the exercise
(See INSPECTIONS, page A-3D