Home / Badge Abuse / State Supreme Court Rules Cops No Longer Need a Warrant to Enter Homes and Seize Evidence

State Supreme Court Rules Cops No Longer Need a Warrant to Enter Homes and Seize Evidence


The Wisconsin Supreme Court just dealt a death blow to the Fourth Amendment, which is supposed to protect a citizen against unreasonable search and seizure. What’s more, the decision was made by a single, newly-appointed judge who was not even present when arguments were made in court.

In a 4-3 decision, the state’s highest court ruled that evidence seized in a person’s private home during a warrantless search can be used against the person under an expanded view of the “community caretaker” clause.

Police went to Charles Matalonis’ house after his brother was found bloodied at a nearby residence. Matalonis, admitting he fought with his brother, let the cops in, where they saw blood in the apartment and some cannabis. They wanted to look inside a locked room, and when Matalonis refused to unlock it, the cops broke in. There they found a cannabis growing setup, whereupon Matalonis was arrested and charged with manufacture of cannabis.

The Court of Appeals had previously ruled this to be an unreasonable search. However, in the majority opinion of the Supreme Court, “Justice Annette Ziegler found that police were not investigating a crime but exercising their “community caretaker” function by checking to make sure no other injured people were in the house.”

This was challenged by three other Justices, who argued that “by the time officers entered the locked room, some 20 minutes or more after they had been in the house, there was little reason to suspect someone else was in the bedroom, but plenty of reason to suspect it might house marijuana.”

READ MORE:  Former Head of Cyber Security Gets 25 Years for Planning to "Violently Rape and Murder Children"

If the case had remained deadlocked at 3-3, then the Court of Appeals ruling that the evidence should be suppressed would have stood. But in a move that is without precedent in the U.S. or the Wisconsin Supreme Courts, newly-appointed Justice Rebecca Bradley cast the deciding vote without participating in oral arguments.

No precedent appears to exist in the United States Supreme Court or in this court for a new justice who did not participate in oral argument to participate in the case without re-argument,” said Justice Shirley Abrahamson.

Bradley was appointed by Governor Scott Walker after Justice Patrick Crooks passed away on Sept. 21, and is now running for election. Bradley had not participated in five earlier cases since her appointment, but decided to chime in on this one. She believed that listening to taped recordings of the arguments, instead of being there in person and involved, was sufficient for her to make the call.

So, an unelected judge appointed by a partisan politician cast a single vote, without being present during arguments, which effectively nullified the Fourth Amendment in that state. Now in Wisconsin, cops can enter a person’s home without a warrant, seize evidence and use it against the person.

The irony is that this attack on the Fourth Amendment is being carried out under the guise of cops being “community caretakers.” In other words, the state presumes that it is doing what’s best for the common good by violating the rights of the individual.

  • Help us spread this important information by clicking (Y) + Commenting + Sharing this story. Thank you.

  • Lawrence Neal

    He LET them in. Never open the door for SA, never let the SA in, without a warrant. Once you let them in, you tacitly agree to let them search.

  • Raymond Ogden

    Yeah. Normally I agree with TFT, but in this case, they’re being a little bit cagey with their language. Yes, the sentence “police can enter your home without a warrant” is technically accurate, but I feel like the clause “with the owner’s permission” was intentionally left out to sensationalize the story and give the less studious reader the impression that a government takeover is currently in progress.

    • Tom Butler

      No it wasn’t. If you read the whole article, although he let them in to the house, he refused them entry into a locked room and they proceeded anyway. They entered that part of the house without a warrant with very specious reasoning and the court didn’t want to take that away.

      • D

        I don’t think he’s referring to the case, but the conclusion the article draws based on the ruling.

      • Brad Schlag

        We’ll assume you meant “suspicious reasoning”. They know you just beat up your brother, you let them in and in plain sight they see pot (another crime) and someone’s blood. Most people’s homes don’t have visible blood. They also see a locked door. They know you are capable of violence, of course they need to make sure you don’t have someone tied and gagged, unconscious or scared to call out behind the door. Not to mention these judges heard the whole case and specifics not covered in this article.

    • Rob Olson

      You seem to forget the rest of it. The homeowner can remove his/her permission at any time. The cops then need to leave and get a warrant. They can NOT continue to search the home.

      • Cody Hutton

        Wrong. If officers have reasonable doubt that a crime is happening they can investigate all they want. For instance if a woman was in her home screaming bloody murder an officer can kick in a door to investigate.

        Unless, you know, you want the woman being raped and murdered to wait for a warrant.

        • Rob Olson

          Please show where in the 4th amendment it says that. I have read it and read it and all I can find is cops need a warrant.

      • Douglas Bartelt

        Unless there is probable cause. Blood on the floor and weed visable is more than enough.

        • Rob Olson

          Where in the 4th amendment does it say that? Here is a copy of the bill of rights. Show me.

  • ftb88

    I assume the beat up brother ratted him out,so the cops new what they were looking for.

  • What. The. Fuck.

  • Thank you Winsconsin! For giving me and millions of others yet another reason not to live there.

  • Jake Hunter

  • I expect there will be a corresponding increase in self-defense claims of homeowners against home invaders.

  • Fascism on the rise!

  • And it’s out right to shoot first, ask questions later.

  • Little by little

  • Not good

  • Hahahahahah! Try thay shit in alaska! That’s a fast ticket to getting shot on the spot!

  • Sick,..and Stupid,…

  • …and the police state grows.

  • Let me guess all the pro-government people are cool with this too? Where are all you guys at??

    • Wtf is this true and in wy ???

    • No not yet but it only takes one state to cross the line before it catches on and moves to others..

    • Right that’s bullshit

  • Stephana Femino

    • That’s nuts! But I doubt it will stand. They will appeal it to the US Supreme Court & hopefully it will get reversed. Unbelievable though & completely frightening!

  • Wtf…smh

  • Scott Walker just needa yo die if a brain anurism

  • This will over turned the state cannot change the bill of rights to satisfy their own illegal actions.

  • thats a good way to get yourself killed cop

  • I do not look forward to the mounting death toll in the police state. if the citizens may take up arms and defend themselves upon the police and the courts that are usurping the Constitution state legislators are but men

  • I won’t even go to Miami for a free vacation because of the reputation of American police. I’ve seen some do illegal searches and kill dogs or shoot children in the process. If you can’t do your job right you should go for retraining not get more privileges.

  • What an embarassment for the legal community.

  • You are shitting me.

  • Let’s go live in Russia.
    I can handle a Gulag!

  • History

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


    History and Scope of the Amendment

    History.—Few provisions of the Bill of Rights grew so directly out of the experience of the colonials as the Fourth Amendment, embodying as it did the protection against the utilization of the “writs of assistance.” But while the insistence on freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures as a fundamental right gained expression in the Colonies late and as a result of experience,1 there was also a rich English experience to draw on. “Every man’s house is his castle” was a maxim much celebrated in England, as was demonstrated in Semayne’s Case, decided in 1603.2 A civil case of execution of process, Semayne’s Case nonetheless recognized the right of the homeowner to defend his house against unlawful entry even by the King’s agents, but at the same time recognized the authority of the appropriate officers to break and enter upon notice in order to arrest or to execute the King’s process. Most famous of the English cases was Entick v. Carrington,3 one of a series of civil actions against state officers who, pursuant to general warrants, had raided many homes and other places in search of materials connected with John Wilkes’ polemical pamphlets attacking not only governmental policies but the King himself.4

    1 Apparently the first statement of freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures appeared in The Rights of the Colonists and a List of Infringements and Violations of Rights, 1772, in the drafting of which Samuel Adams took the lead. 1 B. SCHWARTZ, THE BILL OF RIGHTS: A DOCUMENTARY HISTORY 199, 205-06 (1971).

    2 5 Coke’s Repts. 91a, 77 Eng. Rep. 194 (K.B. 1604). One of the most forceful expressions of the maxim was that of William Pitt in Parliament in 1763: “The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter, the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter—all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.”

    3 19 Howell’s State Trials 1029, 95 Eng. 807 (1705).

    4 See also Wilkes v. Wood, 98 Eng. 489 (C.P. 1763); Huckle v. Money, 95 Eng. Rep. 768 (K.B. 1763), aff’d 19 Howell’s State Trials 1002, 1028; 97 Eng. Rep. 1075 (K.B. 1765).

    Entick, an associate of Wilkes, sued because agents had forcibly broken into his house, broken into locked desks and boxes, and seized many printed charts, pamphlets and the like. In an opinion sweeping in terms, the court declared the warrant and the behavior it authorized subversive “of all the comforts of society,” and the issuance of a warrant for the seizure of all of a person’s papers rather than only those alleged to be criminal in nature “contrary to the genius of the law of England.”5 Besides its general character, said the court, the warrant was bad because it was not issued on a showing of probable cause and no record was required to be made of what had been seized. Entick v. Carrington, the Supreme Court has said, is a “great judgment,” “one of the landmarks of English liberty,” “one of the permanent monuments of the British Constitution,” and a guide to an understanding of what the Framers meant in writing the Fourth Amendment.6

    In the colonies, smuggling rather than seditious libel afforded the leading examples of the necessity for protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. In order to enforce the revenue laws, English authorities made use of writs of assistance, which were general warrants authorizing the bearer to enter any house or other place to search for and seize “prohibited and uncustomed” goods, and commanding all subjects to assist in these endeavors. The writs once issued remained in force throughout the lifetime of the sovereign and six months thereafter. When, upon the death of George II in 1760, the authorities were required to obtain the issuance of new writs, opposition was led by James Otis, who attacked such writs on libertarian grounds and who asserted the invalidity of the authorizing statutes because they conflicted with English constitutionalism.7 Otis lost and the writs were issued and utilized, but his arguments were much cited in the colonies not only on the immediate subject but also with regard to judicial review.

    5 95 Eng. 817, 818.

    6 Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 626 (1886).

    7 The arguments of Otis and others as well as much background material are contained in Quincy’s MASSACHUSETTS REPORTS, 1761-1772, App. I, pp. 395-540, and in 2 LEGAL PAPERS OF JOHN ADAMS 106-47 (Wroth & Zobel eds., 1965). See also Dickerson, Writs of Assistance as a Cause of the American Revolution, in THE ERA OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION: STUDIES INSCRIBED TO EVARTS BOUTELL GREENE 40 (R. Morris, ed., 1939).

  • This could not stand up in court if properly challenged.

  • This is getting soooo out of hand.

  • So the law-enforcement are above the law? That’s not law-enforcement that’s a criminal enterprise

  • Since when did a state Supreme Court decision trump the US Constitution?

  • Well we will see you again in supreme court again. Good Luck with that one.

  • So they can change the 4th amendment but the 2nd amendment is untouchable? Hypocrisy at its worst.

    • You can change anything about the Constitution if the proper steps are taken. Unfortunately state and federal government do not care about that. Neither do the majority of plebs in the United States.

  • Re-reading 1984. This sounds familiar.

  • So sounds like the beginning of the end.

  • Don’t talk to police. Don’t answer the door for police. If arrested immediately ask for a lawyer and stfu. This will prevent 90% of the issues we see with corrupt police behavior.

  • Gavin

  • Goddamned motherfucking public education system. Does anybody know how to READ?. They already had that authority. If evidence of a crime is visible, they don’t need a warrant, and in this case, it was not only visible but they actually had permission to be there. The decision applies only to this and similar cases, not to the 4th amendment as a whole.

  • Definitely becoming more and more a police state there need`s to be action taken here because we know who the intended target`s are i never heard of an intruder breaking into your home to greet you, could this be a dress rehearsal for the real thing NWO Roundup ?

    • Evidence can not be seen if it`s your home and the doors are closed that`s like searching your car and there is no plan evidence in plain sight and without a search warrant you don`t have to by law to submit to a search if a crime has not been committed but than again the system can very well do what they please even murder of innocent people

    • They come here they’ll worry about Police state I can’t abide that either!!

  • Wisconsin… go figure.

  • This is how Liberty dies

  • Now altogether repeat after me:

    “We are free…we are free…we are free.”

  • First off, the gentleman in question let the police in and was in the middle of a domestic dispute. Second the police discovered blood and drugs in the residence the gentleman allowed the police to enter. Then the man doesn’t want to allow thrm to enter a certain room. It’s probable cause. If the guy was violent enough to draw blood and fight with his brother, who’s to say he didn’t hurt someone else? (They could be dead, gagged, or unconscious in that room) I don’t think the verdict will change.

    • Be that as it may, the article indicates that the ruling now in Wisconsin is that a LEO may enter a home without a warrant, search and seize any evidence of a crime, then arrest the people. That in itself is not right.

    • Shailee Marshall curin … Your missing the whole point… The big picture…

    • Fuck your stupid. Go back to your fucking rock you live under. The problem with america is this exact situation. The gov pulls rights and the majority you people are too down right dumb, like really fucking dumb. Its scary to think about..

    • and now you get f**ked up, this domestic dispute is just an simple example of more worse rules to come. In due time all your constitutional rights will be stripped away.

    • The guy LET the police inside. It’s no longer against your 4th amendment right. Had the gentleman turned the police away he wouldn’t have had this problem.
      The police can’t do anything without a warrant or if the victim is no longer on the premises. The guy criminalized himself by allowing the police in the residence. In the article it does say police found the blood and a smaller amount of drugs PRIOR to entering the room. Therefore those two things alone were probable cause to enter the locked room. Any observations made by police while in your home can be used against you. If you don’t want to criminalize yourself refuse entry. If he had refused entry they’d of had to get a search warrant.
      Honestly the Community Caretaker Clause is no different than the implied powers that are given to congress.
      The Cady v Dombrowski case in 1973 enacted this clause by the way so this is NOT a new thing.

    • Wazzy Wazzy, the sheep are indeed dumbed down to no end, and with the continual fluoriation, indoctrination and brainwashing it’s just going to continue. I see and hear them daily and wonder how in the fuk they can even walk and chew gum at the same time.

  • Do they even read the US Constitution before considering shit like this?

    • Did you even bother to read the article? They had permission to enter. The headline is bullshit. BTW, love your wallpaper.

    • Yes the police were let into the house but denied access to that particular room. A person has the right to deny access to part or all of his home and police are required to obtain a warrant to search locked areas unless they believe a human life is in danger. Without satisfying that requirement or consent of the owner, the said search is invalid and inadmissible in court. What the Supreme Court of Wisconsin has done overrides the US
      Constitution and will not stand up in Federal court. We as citizens of USA must stand against any infringement of our constitutional rights as government and courts seek to limit them.

  • The supreme court killed it a long time ago

  • And they will be planting drugs and taking ppls homes.

  • this is vary dangerious this is police state

  • Billy Rikard

  • Good way to get ride of cops

  • Nazis are coming

  • Jxsvs Pieces

  • I don’t know if I can believe this. Need more information

  • This bad news.. And need to be challenge

  • Lock and load.

  • Wellbfuck

  • Neil Rentz

  • But first they have to plant it….

  • Police state is here, it’s real, and you can’t do anything to stop it… apart stop paying taxes, all together.

    • Leave the country.

    • Suck balls idiot.

    • Yo I’m with you Marco. #PoliceThePolice

    • You have to get the ignorant sheep to learn what the LEGAL definition of INCOME is first, then maybe they would grow some balls and tell the foreign entity revenue sucking parasites to fuk off. Until then the sheep will continue to keep paying those taxes to keep paying off that fraudulent debt and the other bogus taxes, thereby supporting the beast that keeps slinging the whip on them. It’s their fukin ignorance, and that ignorance induces their fears of the big bad “government”, or corporation which it really is.

  • BullShit! Without immediate probable cause, search and seizure requires a warrant. That is a Constitutionally protected right. What The Fuck!

  • Matthew Vick

  • If it goes to the Supreme Court, Scalia will be missed.

  • disgusting

  • Things are becoming a little unsettling.

  • nazi germany anyone. If a person enters your home without consent they must be ready to face death!!! badges? we don’t need no stinking badges.!

  • Why are you guys pretending this ruling is valid? Any ruling contrary to the Constitution is null, void and worthless. Police still need a warrant and any attempts at breaking and entering should result is the immediate expulsion of the intruder

    • Lol constitution, good one. Good thing we have a constitutional lawyer as Lord commander in the high Castle.

    • Because the Constitution has stopped every other violation of our rights, right? Lol, laughable at best.

  • Why?

  • get rid of these leg. soon . and repeal everything they do..

  • You Americans are fucked.

  • Best thing people can do is move out of the state of Wisconsin.

  • That is home invasion

  • I find this hard to believe

  • Savana Fox

  • Bullet proof vest don’t protect the face…. Just saying

  • great I hope we can still shoot intruders and uidentified threats.

  • They also have the right to be shot upon entering.

  • Hell will break loose. Pictures of nightly gestapo visites spring to mind. By George!

  • Bull ish they come in without me knowing there might be an accident not In the cops favor and I’m deaf so who’s fault is it? I don’t hear their warnings and the invade my space….

  • That is a declaration of war and will eventually turn ugly for the tyrants. Good luck on your genocidal crucade courts of foreign power.

  • Why did this guy let them in anyway? NEVER let the cops into your home to search… or even just to talk. You open the door as YOU slide out and close it behind you. Do not give the cops the chance to even put a foot in the way of the door as it closes because they WILL … and then they will claim you attacked them with the door unless you let them in to search. Cops are the enemy – and fuck any of you cops reading this that may try to argue the point. Cops … are … the … enemy. Their job is you extort money out of you for the system. If they can’t figure out a way to extort money out of you for fines … their job is to find a way to lock you up so the state can benefit from your labor. Cops are the ENEMY… period.

  • If some fuck tries to enter my home unwarranted they’re getting sprayed.

  • Fuuccckkkkk no I’m shooting whoever enter my shit without permission

  • Time for an armed revolution… Our own govt spits in the faces of Americans…does whatever the fuck they want at our expense…fuck these mother fuckers and anyone who backs them..

  • That would still fall under self defense . So I hope there all prepared for the repercussions

  • Katie Davis

  • Lls I think the government has forgotten the fact that if all of the citizens stood up as one they wouldn’t stand a chance. People need to speak up more and open there eyes. That’s why the world is the way it is now is because people chose to feed into the Bulls..t government propaganda rather than do some actual research themselves to realize the truth.

    • Everyone is sedated by the fluoride in the water, that is how they keep us from standing up and uniting for the greatest good for all.

  • That will be shot down.

  • I’m beginning to understand why Americans need guns.

    • Yep, it really makes me wish that I was living in Europe, right now.

  • Still No One Stand Up And Free American People From This DemoCRAZY & Anti Constitutional The Regime Has Already Put American Without Any Basic Human Rights At All … Or Still Just Sit, Watch TV & Drink A Beer Can Like A Coward Sheep…

  • Isn’t that like giving the keys of the bank to the bank robber.

  • Home invasion ?

  • Reminds me to stay the hell away from wisconSIN !!!!

  • The second any of the shots enter my home, they are dead.

  • You come up in my house without a warrant ya Asa is bound to catch a bullet

  • state law doesn’t trump the constitution.

  • Horrible. This should be appealled.

  • and get shot!!!!

  • Hog wash.. Pew pew

  • you mean to say that the law has just turned cops into thugs.. amazing, feel like clapping!!

  • just a death wish ! its part of their two a day (murders) thugs in uniform, filth. QED

  • I’m sure Americans can shoot people braking into there homes…. maybe this is a way to kill off the whole USA police Forse cause in some way there all bent as fuck

  • i would move away from that police state

  • thats bullshit but that means they bust the door without warrant there breaking in and you can shoot to kill them what happens then

  • This was already included in the NDAA of 2010. I’m surprised that people are just now catching/waking up to it. Literally. LOL

  • LOLif they do at my house I shot first so go ahead come on in and die

  • Tedd Jorge Janice Adam Kenneth Veronica Anna Collette James Rob Canelon

  • Walk into my house without a warrant and you’ll be shot dead

  • The human rights declaration has been violated since its aproval! So the rules has all the rights to violate our rights. ..

  • I don’t know how they could do that. I wasn’t sure how WA did it.

  • Patrick Henry

    Since this violates the CONSTITUTION it is NULL and Void and carries no force of law. Marbury v. Madison: 5 US 137 (1803):
    “No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.”
    If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional by Marbury v. Madison.

    • James Worzalla

      Tell that to the court of law and see how much it holds up… the facts are, these exceptions are made with the generality and verbiage of the constitution in mind. In this case the 4th amendment a person is protected against “unreasonable” search and seizures. what determines unreasonable? it has been determined though not completely thorough through a multitude of case laws. I’ll let you do the research

  • Randall Covey

    Another “successful” fishing expedition… the cops will get medals.

  • wtf

  • B.S. F-That!!!

  • Scalia would never approved of this!

  • James Blanton

    This will get appealed to the US Supreme Court and overturned doubt it will stand to US scrutiny.

  • a very bad thing…….

  • I know the law I practice it everyday and from my perspective this is nust another masked step torward communism. The state manipulates and twist just about every crime committed to mold it into as many charges as possible. The same applies with the laws. Every time they pass another law like this it just gives them another lop hole to make a defendants case easier for them to prosecute and sets the standards to ones rights weaker and weaker. Read case law folks. Look at the original intent of a crime then look at how prosecutors continue to manipulate jurers over the years to completely redefine an original intent of a crime so it lowers the standard to get a conviction and opens the door for every other prosecutor to get a conviction and continue to lower the standard till eventually they can turn something a defendant did into a conviction of something completely opposite of what they actually did. Here comes communism folks

  • Heidi

    Death of the 4th Amendment? Not hardly. This exception to the warrant requirement is long established in case law. Further, oral argument is not required. Perhaps someone with some knowledge of jurisprudence and case law should write these articles.

    • Rob Olson

      Maybe you need to learn the constitution

      • Travis LaBranche

        I agree with Heidi. This article has left out many details of the actual case, but without going into all of them, the police officer found drops of blood on the locked door and had an objective reason to believe that someone may be injured because Matalonis’s brother had told the police that he was beaten by four people outside a bar. The police followed the blood trail to Matalonis’s home where he consented to a search. Matalonis lied to the police when he stated that he lived alone. The police officer’s suspicion of Matalonis grew because he appeared nervous when they asked him about the locked room. The officer believed this might be because someone was injured in that room, so the officer located the key to the room and searched it.

        The Fourth Amendment requires that searches be reasonable. Using a reasonable standard, exigent circumstances allow police officers to conduct searches when police are in hot pursuit of a suspect or to render emergency aid. The caretaker provision of Wisconsin law falls under the emergency aid exception the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently upheld. Should this case be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, it is likely that this ruling will be upheld.

        The court’s opinion can be found below:

        • Rob Olson

          Here is a copy of the bill of rights. Please show me where it says that cops can force their way in without a warrant, and also show me where it says the state supreme court can over rule the bill of rights.

    • Von Arney

      We don’t care about jurisprudence or case law.

      We care about ORIGINAL INTENT.

    • Justin Price

      Um, the 3 dissenting justices themselves said the decision “swallows the 4th amendment.” And the issue is the EXPANSION of the “exception” you mention, called “community caretaker”, not the exception itself.

    • Shane Freund

      You should go take a shit. It’s backing up out of your mouth.

      • jj

        So classy

      • Greg

        So, by the sounds of your expertise in your response, Heidi is correct.

  • Armor piercing rounds always chambered and ready to go. …the door is locked not to protect me but to protect you.

  • WTF, Constitution is twisting in the wind, how can 7 learned Judges, can be this FUCKING DUMB.
    Are we the United States of America or 49 states and Wisconsin.
    Just plain FUCKING FUCKTARDS, how the FUCKTARDS wake up in the morning and try to rewrite a SACRED DOCUMENT of the USA.

  • Duck the police and the government

  • Sounds like people need to vote a few people out of office !!

  • David Hoffman

    Never a good idea to “open the door” for a cop… They DO NOT have your best interest in mind – EVER….

  • Wisconsin State Supreme Court, or the STATE OF WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT ? Which one is it ? The corporate one that is ASSUMING authority to RULE on STATUTES, ACTS, and CODES of the corporation and thus allowing the corporation to enforce those RULES on the PRESUMED CITIZENS SUBJECT to a PRESUMED LEGAL FICTION to abide by those corporate CODES, or the one which is supposed to be Constitutionally Lawful and abides by the Constitution.


  • Wow, how stupid.

  • outright bullshit

  • WTF?!

  • Let it be known, If you come into my house without me, asking you , YOU WILL DIE! I DO NOT Care what kind of Suit You are wearring.The COTUS,Supper seeds any state law, Passed by a ——– Well , you get the idea.

  • Then again and i again i just HATE PIGS……….


    • NOT illegal. They had permission to enter, and observed evidence. Did you bother to read the article?


    • Speeding is not probable cause to search, and you still choose to ignore that they HAD PERMISSION. DAFIOH

  • I’ve Ben violated left and right

  • Brandon Miklaski

  • Sg Harley


  • Scary!

  • Blame these clock suckers!!!

  • And these fuck nuts!!!

  • Just remember. …

  • Don’t you all know Wisconsin is run by idiots that want to take away all of your rights.


  • “By the people” means the people chose and the government enforces. Government is taking it upon themselves to create socialistic rules. People… think about your vote.

  • Rawleye

    According to the article it was 4 votes not a single vote that changed the decision. Despite whether it was the right decision or not, I don’t understand the uproar about the judge not being there. If she listened to the arguments and read written documents of what was said (I assume they record “minutes”). Why wouldn’t that be sufficient?

  • The tyrant states of America. It is the fault of the Unconscious, cowardly American peasant. American is a hopeless, lost cause because these peasants are unconscious animals, human cattle that have been herded up by their evil masters ( all government that currently infests America)! Americans are breathtakingly stupid peasants!

  • so that needs to be stopped


  • Cam Alft

    never let cops into your home….they are criminals with a badge!

    • Greg

      Until you need one, then you’re all “Yes sir, thank you for coming”.

      • Cam Alft

        nope,never once,don’t need them!in fact the last time one was out to our clubhouse he was drunk and waving his gun around like a prince,we shut him down and threw him into his truck!i can tell you about the time i had to go toe to toe with a few,or the time i got the best of one trying to kiddnap my daughter,we can go there!,i never call the cops!i take care of my own shit!and when or if i get the worst,it’s just go home lick your wounds and come back out for another day,no cops!!and i never say thanks to a thief or rapists!!why…would you?sick f’kn world we live in eh?

      • Corey Felsman

        That’s the problem. People these days they’re too scared to even call the police when they need them. My 9 year old sister even knows this a kid in class was bullying her and my mom says to her “well do you want me to call the cops” and she says “no way I want her to be nice not beaten to death”.

  • Its called Treason

  • that would go against the constitution

  • Wow??

  • :/

  • Then EFF the State!

  • Yeah right.

  • All they need to do is take it to the supreme court.

  • no longer need warrants ? time to start shooting the fucking clowns then . btw…. someone should name all who signed this bill and there start a mass tort lawsuit against them . nothing should ever trump your con

  • Hey, that’s where they made Making a Murderer, so this corruption and support of illegal police activity shouldn’t really surprise anyone, though it should ALARM everyone..

  • Lorraine Tipton You must be so happy you got out of that place.

  • Ken Morrow

    So the remedy is don’t open the door.

  • I am seeking Private Individuals to Unite to create our own Private Membership Association so we will not be defined under the U.C.C. As ” INTERFERING IN COMMERCE” so we the people can and will make a difference for ALL MEMBERS IN MULTIPLE WAYS using the CORRECT STRUCTURES both NATIONALLY and INTERNATIONALLY!!! Feel free to email me if interested in GOING AROUND THE PUBLIC IN A Private Way instead of getting constantly upset at always going through THE PUBLIC MARTIAL LAW JURISDICTIONS!!!
    EMAIL: [email protected]

  • Nothing to be alarmed about. Relax. Don’t get nervous. Watch a movie:


  • Dan Wood

    The author of this article needs to go back to clown college or wherever he learned about the law. This is clearly a case in which the 4th amendment exception applies. Plain view and exigent circumstances (the blood.)

    • Rob Olson

      When did cops learn to see through walls. People like you are the reason cops and politicians keep steps all over our rights. Stop giving them authorities they don’t and can’t have.

      • Dan Wood

        Uh, in this case the guy let them into his house and they saw blood and cannabis… that’s grounds for a warrant, and to check the house for any more injured parties. I have 16 years in Law Enforcement and The author of this article is playing word games, and is a moron.

        • Rob Olson

          You say they need a warrant, then change your tune and say they don’t need a warrant. You just proved what people say “that cops do have the lowest iq of any profession”.

          • Dan Wood

            You don’t understand written English apparently; they COULD have gotten a warrant BASED ON THE PLAIN VIEW EVIDENCE, but since there was a violent fight they were ok to search the house for other injured people WITHOUT A WARRANT because of the blood they saw when they were INVITED into the house. Go read some caselaw before you try to argue about things that you know nothing about. By resorting to petty insults about your perception of law enforcement officers intelligence as a whole, you’re just proving that you’re an “Internet lawyer” since we’re using quotation marks to look cool now.

          • Rob Olson

            I do read English. It is called the constitution. Not some law that allows you criminals with badge to think you can violate it.

          • Rob Olson

            and the quotes aren’t there to be “cool”. They are other because that is what one does when they quote someone.

    • Jason Harrison

      Yes, and what is referred to as “probable cause”

    • Ffi

      “Recognizing exemptions to great principles always creates the hazard, of course, that the exemptions will devour the rule ”
      Justice William Brennan

  • Yankees and liberals let stuff like that happen. Walk into a Texas home with no warrant and see what happens to you. Gun fights are a Texas tradition. My dad’s a sheriff’s deputy and he has told me if anybody (cop, military or otherwise) comes in his house to take anything without a warrant, they will not walk out and I stand by that 100%.

  • Bull shit!! Not right I want abide it!!

  • There has been no change in your own home !! They must have a warrant to search!!

  • Tony

    I have really had it. People running to be our president, just barely smart enough to wipe there red asses. I propose a NEW MODERN CONSTITUTION. I human one vote, no longer 100,000,000.00 per vote. Something is all fucked up. Am I the only person that awake….its like a monty python bad dream

  • Dennis Rogge

    Yeah, so they can enter without a warrant, under the pretense of investigating another ” so called crime” and then bust you out for something as harmless as pot

  • They better stock up on body bags I will shoot the first motherfucker through my door

  • Daniel J Rondello

    Why do Republicans seem to think The United States is a confederacy? It’s not. Federal laws have sovreignity of state laws.

  • Mark Wells

    You have only one chance to refuse a search. Once they are inside your car, home, or have their whole hand shoved up your ass, it’s too late.

  • Dago

    Bullshit hit piece.

  • lordwoodsman

    NO, stop lying. The 4th Amendment is doing just fine. 1) New justice wasn’t on the Supreme Court when the arguments were made, but she is there fulfilling her legal role and did listen to the recordings and heard the other judges positions before voting. 2) Cops can’t just walk into your house without a warrant. But there have always been necessary exceptions to allow them in without one. If you shoot someone and then run into your house or mine, they can follow you in and arrest you. If you INVITE them in (which is the 1st part of what happened here), they can come in. If they see you hitting someone through your big front window or see illegal drugs sitting on your table after inviting you in, that’s called “Plain Sight” and they can enter/use that evidence. That’s the 2nd part of what happened here. If they have reason to believe evidence is about to be destroyed or that someone may be in danger inside, they can enter. And that’s the 3rd part of what happened here. He beat up his brother, they came to talk to him about it and he invited them in. They saw Pot and blood in the apartment and saw a locked door. As he had just beaten someone down the street and they saw blood in the apartment, they were understandable concerned that someone else was hurt in the apartment and may be behind the locked door. I don’t like things that Walker is doing these days either, but lets not take the police and the court doing their job and try to turn it into one more attack against the Gov. If you don’t provide evidence to make Police suspect you are harming someone or leave illegal things in plain sight for them and the community to see, they still can’t come barging into your home.

    • James Worzalla

      I just would like to alter that last statement: the Police can indeed barge into your home under certain circumstance as in the case in State vs Pinkard 2010 WI 81, in which officers received a tip that there were people in a residence that were unconscious within the vicinity of Cocaine. The officers entered the residence to check on the welfare of the occupants, using a concern for possible overdose as a means to enter without warrant.

      There are other cases that unlawful entry can be excused or justified; if the officer acquired evidence lawfully, i.e. via later consent to search (State v. Artic, 2010 WI 83) or, supported by probable cause or “exigent circumstances” (State v. Robinson, 2010 WI 80).

      Bottom line, they can enter your home without warrant and seize evidence as long as they can prove their actions were lawful and just.

  • James Worzalla

    unfortunately, under the “community caretaker” exception, an officer can enter search every room in a house if they believe that there is a person in danger. in this case, the officers could have entered the house even without consent or a warrant with reasonable belief that someone inside is seriously injured. Then, conduct a sweep to secure that no one else in the residence was injured or otherwise in danger. This thus extends the plain view doctrine which allows an officer to seize,without a warrant, evidence and contraband found in plain view during a lawful observation. this in not a new practice and this article is worse than a Fox News report…

  • alexander

    So much for the Republican love of the Constitution !!!

  • Double D

    i think it falls under #2 in this case. he gave consent. but they can only search what is in site of there eyes when given permission to enter with out a warrant. and since they found a violation “the Pot” that gave them the right to search without a warrant. also the fact there was cause to believe that there could be another Victim in the home also gave them the right.

    Wisconsin state statue.

    23.61  Search and seizure; when authorized. A search of a person, object or place may be made and things may be seized when the search is made:

    (1) Incident to a lawful arrest;
    (2) With consent;
    (3) Pursuant to a valid search warrant;
    (4) With the authority and within the scope of a right of lawful inspection;
    (5) Incident to the issuance of a lawfully issued citation under s. 23.60;
    (6) During an authorized temporary questioning under s. 23.59; or
    (7) As otherwise authorized by law.

    History: 1975 c. 365.
    The warrant-less search of a fisherman’s truck by state conservation wardens under s. 29.33 (6) [now s. 29.519 (6)] was presumptively reasonable. State v. Erickson, 101 Wis. 2d 224, 303 N.W.2d 850 (Ct. App. 1981)

  • Ernst Loehl Sr.

    Well I think that now,,,law enforcement are considered ”Community Caretakers,, if I’m out of milk and bread,,for my personal well being,, they should run to the store for me if I’m ill.. See how that plays out !!!

  • Corey Felsman

    That was my first thought.

  • Corey Felsman

    So, maybe this wasn’t the best example to use for this article since it seems like it’s not such ac cut and dry case I mean it does seem like there was probable cause.

  • Iamacitizen2


    The wording used when a person is read the Miranda Warning, also
    known as being ‘Mirandized,’ is clear and direct:

    “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be
    used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you
    cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the
    rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak
    to me?”

    Question: I was not read my Miranda Rights. Will my case be dismissed?

    Answer: Not likely, but possible. It depends on the case, what the issue is and what was
    garnered after the questioning started. A DUI case, as we may have mentioned in
    some earlier discussions, Miranda is generally not quite as important because
    there’s not a lot of evidence taken after the person is put into custody. A
    murder case, if a person’s in custody and they did not read the Miranda and
    then during the interrogation [provide] evidence that proves the murder, that
    might be a case where the case could be dismissed; or, what would happen would
    be the evidence would be excluded, and then without evidence then the case would
    have to be dismissed.

    • Gene

      Pretty sure the Miranda rights are a TV myth, been arrested 3x’s by different cities and states, never once read my rights. They laughed the first time I asked. Will feign ignorance, but I’m pretty sure it’s not practiced.

      • Chris Holcomb

        the fact that you believe miranda rights to be a tv myth is a horrid reflection on the current state of affairs, the miranda doctrine does exsist and so does the “Terry frisk” dont let bully cops who never even studyied the laws dictate to you…. this is the reason we have councel and attorneys, because the people enforcing the law rarely study it

        • Anonymous

          That’s why when you know the law, so often they call you a “jailhouse lawyer” or ask you “are you a lawyer?” like “if we don’t know the law we are sworn to uphold, how do you know it if you aren’t a lawyer?”

        • Kian O’Floinn

          It has happened to me twice

      • Chris Street

        You don’t have to give Miranda warning unless you are asking or are going to ask incriminating questions.

      • ★$gт★$ℓ๑ттεя★

        It’s no longer required that they read you your rights. Been that way for years

      • Everybody has the right to remain silent. Unfortunately, almost nobody has the ABILITY. And, everything you say (that is harmful to you) will be used against you and everything you say (that may be helpful to you) will be excluded as “hearsay” unless you waive your right to remain silent and testify, subjecting yourself to cross-examination…
        You have the right to remain silent when you wake up in the morning and when you go to bed at night. If a cop tells you about your right to remain silent… It is probably too late.

  • Floki

    What do you expect from a state where they can now take your dna just for being arrested. Not charged with a crime, just arrested.

    • Anonymous

      Or if you are a commercial driver and involved in an accident, regardless of fault, even if you could not have done anything to prevent it…you STILL have to get drug tested

      • Kian O’Floinn

        I’m a GOM diver. Yes you are correct.

        • Anonymous

          Yep. The law says anyone who is covered by the Hours of Service law must submit to a random drug test, also anytime they are involved in an accident, regardless of fault. Not sure if the law covers student, sprort or private pilot, although it does cover commercial and atp.

          • Jon Steele

            The law is an “arse.”

          • Kian O’Floinn

            Your mother is a whooker. She suxs negro cokk in Miami

    • Kian O’Floinn

      Where is that?

  • I wonder who these a-holes are that have infiltrated our courts? It’s as if some foreign enemy has planted judges around the country to deliberately create these unconstitutional rulings.

    • 69troyjan

      They’re called zionist Jews, they make up most of Congress too !


        Haz nothing to Do with race and religion. They screw their Own over too. so, its just greedy power hungry ass wipes, from every and all corners of the globe. lets not muddy it by bringing prejudice into it.

        • Kian O’Floinn

          There us only one Friggen race. Black isn’t a race, white isn’t a race, on and on. And haz is spelled has.

          • ebm120

            Tell that to a doctor. Tell him to treat the white, black, and asian (for lack of a better term) person exactly the same. You will be laughed out of his office.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            You are quite the simpleton. Thank you for the laugh.

          • ebm120

            I guess those Doctors are all simpleton too.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            Again it isn’t a race . Did you not pay attention in science class? We have the human race and then differing species of animals and insects.

            Simple simpleton.

          • Jon Steele

            Shove your pc “human race” shit back up your ass, you sanctimonious oaf. Same as there are different breeds of dogs, cats, horses, etc. same as their are different breeds (races) of human beings. PERIOD. The mainstream science books that you were indoctrinated with were written by Cultural Marxists who promote the bogus theories of Franz Boas (who was a Jew by the way), you fucking ignorant clown.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            Hey idiot mother fuvker.
            Dogs and cats are two different species of animals with differing breeds dumbass cock dmoker.
            Humans are classified as one race with different breeds and cultures you fucking retarded baboon.

            You like how I voided the P.C. diologe corky. You are a shining example of what a liberal really is.

          • Steven Pierce


          • Tinman0670

            Inbred redneck fucktard.

          • Jon Steele

            The “simpletons” are those that believe in the myth “racial equality.”

        • Donald Dunham

          I Concur Varakienen the Wealthiest of All are the most ENTITLED!!!
          We’ve all seen it. It’s Never a pretty sight ever. Unfortunately Brother I hate it as much as u but, This freaking world has FAR to Much Prejudice & Racism. It’s when U have Multi Billionaire’s getting together to elect their Messed Up versions of Government Officials etc.etc. Not a Conspiracy OPEN YOUR Eyes & Minds People. I’m truly affraid for my Grandchildren to be sure. WORLDWIDE!!!

      • John Carter

        They’re called racist idiots. That would be you injecting your twisted little panty problems into the debate.

        • Jon Steele

          WRONG again. The “idiots” are the anti-racists.

          • Steven Pierce

            Wrong. It is persons like you that continue to raise this sense of partisanship among the people that should be united against this abuse. While people pay attention to biased hatred from people like you the people that should be the focus of our concern are free to operate in a divided system that should be the real power in our government.

          • Tinman0670

            Commie? Better than being a Nazi like you.

    • Not pro Israel

      Fischer was very outspoken in his condemnation of the Zionist conspirators controlling America. Like Ezra Pound, Fischer also became an ‘ex-pat’, relocating to Japan.

      “My main interest right now is to expose the Jews. This is a lot bigger than me. They’re not just persecuting me. This is not just my struggle, I’m not just doing this for myself… This is life and death for the world. These God-damn Jews have to be stopped. They’re a menace to the whole world.”

      – Quote by Bobby Fischer
      “We are in the hands of the Jews. They can do what they please with our values.”

      Adams advised against investment except in the form of gold locked in a safe deposit box:

      “There you have no risk but the burglar. In any other form you have the burglar, the Jew, the Czar, the socialist, and, above all, the total irremediable, radical rottenness of our whole social, industrial, financial and political system.”

       – Quotes by Henry Adams

      “You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-jewed the Jew”

      “And the big Jew has rotted every nation he has wormed into.”

      “Your infamy is bound up with Judaea. You can not touch a sore or a shame in your empire but you find a Mond, a Sassoon, or a Goldsmid.”

      – Quotes by Ezra Pound

      “And if after having elected their man or group, obedience is not rendered to the Jewish control, then you speedily hear of “scandals” and “investigations” and “impeachments” for the removal of the disobedient.”

      “I know who caused the war (World War I) – the Jewish bankers! I have the evidence here. Facts!”

      – Quotes by Henry Ford

      • behindthecamera

        You really are a special breed of asshole, aren’t you?

        • Not pro Israel

          Israel sux.

        • Jon Steele

          “Special breed of asshole” is your specialty, you pro-Israel blockhead.

          • behindthecamera

            Have a Snickers, Jon Steele. You’re not yourself when you’re a raging jerk. Oh, wait…

    • Kian O’Floinn

      Liberal communist degenerates.

      • Tan Danglesworth

        Reading is fundemental..”Bradley was appointed by Governor Scott Walker”. This is why contards should be euthanized or neutered at least.

        • Kian O’Floinn

          Contards? Really? That’s a new one lol. Friggen hippy.

          • Tan Danglesworth

            I guess you would prefer rushPUBIKkklan. limbaugh is your prophet, you want govt. control over gays and abortion, and the klan is what you identify with. Friggin fascist.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            Lol. Awwwe snowflake don’t get all BUTT hurt now that Trump is going to be your new daddy.
            Gays? Hmmm I’m disgusted with the hypocritical platform homo’s have adopted and regular discuss it with my Butch daughter.
            Klan? I do not recognize that enity of the Democratic south. I’m willing to bet you know nothing of the Klan.
            Tory Judges?
            At times they are an asset.

            As for me I am pretty much a libertarian and far from a facist.

          • Tan Danglesworth

            Libertarian? You mean pot smoking republican. Funny, explain to me how libertarian ideals mesh with a fascist like trump. As for the klan, I’m southern and know exactly what those scared little band of white boys is about. Trump won’t be my new daddy, I’m not too poor to relocate.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            Hahaha pot smoking republican. You made my day with that one lol. See we do agree somewhat.
            Myself being a small business operator I welcome Trump as my new daddy, and also being a vet I believe he will do the right thing.
            I also have that bug out plan instilled. I’ll give it a year,, See where we are at a make a judgement call after that.
            Central America maybe my new home.

          • Frostbitten

            I’m sorry to hear that you’re retarded. Good luck in Central America, you’ll need it with your small brain.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            See I told you Trump will be you’re new daddy snowflake hahaha now fuck off and kill yourself

          • Jon Steele

            Fascists are cool.

          • Steven Pierce


          • I’m confused by your positions, Kian…? You start off with the mindless slam of “liberals” in response to an article pointing out how the so-called “conservatives” have put yet another “conservative” judge on the bench, who continues with the anti-constitutional dismemberment of the protections FROM the government afforded to the people in the Bill of Rights…
            People lose, government wins.
            If being offended by that makes me a “hippy” than your being comfortable with it makes you a Loyalist no better than the American colonists who remained loyal to the British Crown during the American Revolutionary War.
            Patriots called them “persons inimical to the liberties of America”. Just like you and this over-reaching, “conservative” Tory judge.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            Where is the mindless slam libtard?

          • Steven Pierce

            Lets quote for you. “Liberal communist degenerates”. You can not even keep track of your own comments? Are you here to just stir the pot of division? That just means you are part of opposition to freedom.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            You communist lazy fucks divide yourselves then blame us, the working educated Americans. Go Fucking die you useless parasite.

          • Tinman0670

            I’m sure you first name is spelled Klan.

          • Kian O’Floinn

            How you like you’re new daddy President Trump you Fucking chump. Hahaha

          • Tinman0670

            I’m sure you’re happy you fucking Nazi.

        • Tinman0670

          I prefer the Nazis be euthanized.

      • Steven Pierce

        Appointed by Scott Walker. Did you miss that little bit? The deciding Judge was a Progressive Republican Gov.

        Stop the partisanship and open your mind to the real cause of this atrocious rape of the constitution. It is coming from both sides of our two party system of corruption.

        • Kian O’Floinn

          No such thing as a progressive republican dumb ass.

      • Tinman0670

        Nazi scumbag.

        • Kian O’Floinn

          Why thank you commie cock- sucker. Oh daddy Trump’s pain train is coming for you mother fuckers, haha.

    • james crawford

      it’s called the GOP.

      • Jon Steele

        WRONG. It’s called Democrats.

        • Steven Pierce

          Wrong its called the Oligarchy.

        • Zeconte

          How, exactly, do you reason that a GOP governor appointing a GOP judge is the fault of Democrats? Or are you one of those people who believes you don’t need things like facts or logic to know the truth about things?

          • Difdi

            The Democrats and Republicans only look like they are opposed to eachother on the Liberal/Conservative political axis. But there’s more than one political axis in play.

            If you look at the Totalitarian/Libertarian axis, the Democrat and Republican parties are nearly identical. They’re not opposed at all, they just disagree on which of the rights of the common people needs to go first.

            Steven Pierce has it right — it’s not about Democrat or Republican, right or left, it’s about the fact that they’re working together to keep themselves in power. Call them what you will, the oligarchy, the 1%, it’s all the same. They rule, we serve, and anything or anyone that tries to change that and has any chance of success gets annihilated by the full might of the government.

        • Tinman0670

          Moron, who is the Governor of Wisconsin? And who put this Nazi on the bench. I’ll give you a clue, it wasn’t a Democrat you inbred fuck.

          • Difdi

            Moron? You’re just as much of an inbred fuck as he is. Both sheeple. The Democrats and Republicans aren’t opposed to eachother at all, they are in complete agreement that you and I and him have too many rights and those rights need to go.

          • Tinman0670

            Inbred? Go fuck yourself and stop fucking your sister you piece of shit.

          • Donald Dunham

            Finally, someone with the Blinders Off about Political Forums They’re ALWAYS on the SAME Page eh! How many politicians does it take to screw shight up? All of them lol.

    • Tan Danglesworth

      Wonder no more! The story clearly states “Bradley was appointed by Governor Scott Walker”. Yet another example of conservative ideological bs . Local and state elections matter, people.

      • Difdi

        Never forgetting that liberals also plant sleeper agents in the courts. The courts are supposed to be about non-partisan justice, not advancing a corrupt political agenda.

        The only real difference between liberals and conservatives in the US is they disagree on which rights the common people should lose first. They are in complete agreement that we have ‘too many’ rights.

        • Tan Danglesworth

          Please elaborate, as not all liberals but most would agree, there are limits to rights. Are you looking for a no knock search at your residence?

          • Difdi

            Please elaborate, why your first knee-jerk response to a dissenting view is fascism?

          • Tan Danglesworth

            Defend your ideology with something more than elementary debate. If you care to elaborate, I am sure to uncover the fascist tendencies within.

        • Cynic17

          “The courts are supposed to be about non-partisan justice, not advancing a corrupt political agenda.”

          Then feel free to explain the situation in states that allow justices to be elected along partisan lines.

    • Pat Enery

      There are two groups of a-holes. The first group were lawyers who got Lincoln to make a new 13th amendment under martial law & without the rebel states whose governments were, prior to the Civil War, properly elected. The original 13th Amendment was never repealed. The second group is more sinister. Financed by the Rothschild banking dynasty, this group infiltrated our government during the 1912 election by blackmail. They got a Supreme Court appointment of one of their own followed by the sneaking in of the Federal Reserve. The 16th & 17th amendments came shortly thereafter. Money depleting war & the financial collapse of Germany soon followed. This history is necessary to understand so as to reconcile what is happening today.

      • Cynic17

        Time to change the tinfoil, Pat.

  • Gary Spears

    Anyone entering into a private residence unlawfully should be met with deadly force.

    • Mike Townsend


    • james crawford

      that has happened before. The cops killed the guy, who was a retired detective and then they found out they did a “no knock” on the wrong house. Nothing happened. Oops, sorry.

      • Difdi

        Which is why one guy going against a dozen is stupid. IEDs are the way to go — after all, if what you have to hide will send you to prison for the rest of your life and blowing up a dozen corrupt cops will send you to prison for the rest of your life…why not?

        • John Redman

          We converted the old sprinkler system a section at a time. Gravity feed of petro and CO2 propellant for the push to get it onto anyone in the yard for about 15 seconds…then I toss out the road flare and call it a BBQ.

        • SuperTech86

          “Which is why one guy going against a dozen is stupid.”

          Which is what the M240 in my closet is for.

    • El Baconcabra

      I agree, but only if they enter without permission. “Matalonis, admitting he fought with his brother, let the cops in “. Matalonis was a freaking idiot, and because of that the people of Wisconsin have lost a precious right.

    • David F Mayer

      DID NOT enter illegally. Read again:

      “Matalonis, admitting he fought with his brother, let the cops in, where they saw blood in the apartment and some cannabis.” Cops were let in.

      Found blood (evidence of violence) and contraband (cannabis). Reasonable grounds for complete search.

      End of story.

      • Gaylen Anderson

        Reasonable ground for Matalonis to get pissed and blow the men in blue away.

      • ste8875

        Actually if they believed that it was a grow house and they were in the house already, then there was no reason for them to kick in the door. Matalonis admitted to fighting his brother, which is a domestic violence charge, arrest him. Then put an officer on the door to make sure nobody goes in to destroy the evidence they believe to be in the room, and go get a search warrant. There was no exigent circumstances to make a forced entry. That judge is an idiot and the reason I hate that supreme court justices are appointed for life.

      • Willie Smith Jr

        Ur a n idiot the appeals ruled it was an illegal search u didn’t read that trump then Biased Supreme Court was deadlocked until politics got involved u close mind repubs are screwing up this country

  • agb1953

    SCOTUS will reverse this stupidity. In the past, courts have decided slavery and segregation were legal.

    • Kian O’Floinn

      You do know Negros want separatism back? Slavery should be brought back.

      • Melvin Mackall

        Bitch uck you

        • Kian O’Floinn

          WTH is uck you? Oh you’re just another uneducated nigger………..

        • Melvin Mackall

          You dirty white caveman punk bitch going back to the mountains

      • Frostbitten

        At least you’re open about being stupid. A small step in the right direction.

        • Kian O’Floinn

          Thanks, you set a great example to follow.

  • Jeff Hyams

    What do you call an attorney with an IQ of 50?

    Your honor.

    • M W Sudan

      When you can’t make it in private practice- get a black robe!

      • rivory

        or a white one ?

    • canucanoe2

      What’s the difference between a lawyer and a sperm?

      A sperm has a one in a million chance of becoming a human being.

  • John Seychel

    This shit is written into the constitution. The first lawsuit this law will be denounced.

  • Paul Klinger

    Freedom. Republican style.

    • Jon Steele

      More like cuckservative style.

      • Kian O’Floinn

        Does it hurt your head to be that gay?

  • David Roach

    this ruling doesnt allow warrant-less searches people stop applying
    your belief to a ruling like this your only hurting our cause by putting
    false info out like this you make a cop believe he can do it they had
    probable cause because he admitted to a physical fight with the man who
    was beaten he gave them reason to believe he may have done the beating

    • james crawford

      Apparently you don’t understand in the least the implications of this ruling. Nor are you familiar with the concept of the “slippery slope”. At one time, it was illegal to search a person’s automobile without a warning. Then the law was changed so that police could search “if they felt there was a possibility of a weapon” for their own safety. Everybody wanted our officers to be safe, so it was passed. Now they can search every part of an automobile, identify and search all passengers and take the damn car completely apart to search if they want to. Police have even been known to perform roadside full body cavity searches without a warrant or cause.

      So, don’t be so smarmy in your assumption, because you are wrong, dead wrong.

  • Steve Yakoban

    Ever heard of the Patriot Act? Rights are gone.

    • ★$gт★$ℓ๑ттεя★

      Ever heard of cor-bon?

    • Jon Steele

      More like anti-Patriot Act. It has to be repealed!

  • Kyle Cardinal

    Cuz Freedom….You idiot Americans clueing in yet?? A stolen election Live on TV. Laws noone wants…But freedom and Democracy n stuff….Cuz M’erica…..

  • teddy6139


  • Donald Dunham


    Sincerely: Don Dunham

    • behindthecamera

      Don, have a Snickers. You’re not yourself when you’re hungry.

      • Best fucking response of the day goes to… YOU!

      • Donald Dunham

        Cute Comment, “Is That Detriment or Comical? I’m leaning toward Sarcasm? Please Do Tell I’m Quite Curious to be sure.

    • Tara McFly

      The Caps Lock button is right beside the “A” on the left side of your keyboard.
      Is yours broken? You might want to get another keyboard.

    • Donald Dunham

      Easy McFly, people might think you a Grammar Nazi eh! lol. Detriment & Ignorance are Choices one makes when Condescending others. So lets remove that Prophylactic from your head and STOP Acting Like a Big PENIS w/ears eh? oops did I type that out loud? LMAO… Happy New Year McFly

  • Kian O’Floinn

    Time for a civil ……………Wait for it, wait for it , wait for it. [email protected]…………

  • zega
  • Mary Lee Wallace

    They were allowed in by the resident, anything they had in their view was open for evaluation. Officers obviously saw all the weed as “reasonable cause” to search the house. That caretaker stuff doesn’t make any sense though, when “reasonable cause” is right there, it seems like double talk.

  • John Redman

    Any violation of any Right which has been previously determined to be Inalienable will be defended with Extreme Prejudice. Is there a problem with the corporate Oligarchy coming to terms with the words; Inalienable, Unalienable? These come from Self-Determination, not documents drafted by sociopaths with machinations to Rule. I demand to see Evidence of Legitimacy of Authority. Who has the Special Privilege to issue Rights? Who has this Power to take Inalienable Natural Rights through use of force or through scheming in private? Who are these dim beings who take up arms against their communities believing themselves to have Legitimate Authority? There exists NO Legitimacy to ANY Authority…there exists demands on paper and those ignorant enough to enforce such edicts. Sic Semper Tyrannis. Show me Evidence or be prepared to be dealt with.

  • computerjockey

    That will never be upheld by the Supreme Court…

  • Jon Jones

    the court is correct, so were the cops. Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine

    • If the court were correct, the entry without a warrant along with the extended stay, would make the MJ growing equipment the fruit of the poisonous tree. Sadly, the doctrine has been whittled away by the U.S. Supremes… Here, they avoided the issue by parking the invasion of a private area under the “community caretaker” exception. Application of intellectual horsepower to do harm to the pretty straightforward protections envisioned by our founders.

  • Epeefencer

    I’m sure this will go to the US Supreme court. Talk about a state over stepping their authority.

  • Ron Arnold

    Texas , cops no knocked on a drug dealers house or suspected of and were shot dead , no charges filed . you come into someone home expected to leave that home in a body bag thats anyone not just law.

  • Joe Kulik

    1) This ruling Does NOT negate the whole 4th Amendment, only cases where cops have reason to believe that someone’s welfare might be in danger. Cops Have ALWAYS Been able to conduct a warrantless search, for instance, if they hear someone calling for help from inside a locked house. 2) This ruling does not seem to be a wide reaching precedent, & applies chiefly to the case in question. 3) I have sincere doubts if this ruling will be validated by the U.S. Supreme Court, even with the most Conservative roster of Justices. If the U.S. Supreme Court does validate it, it will be a VERY Restricted ruling, apllicable only in limited cases…4) The BIGGEST Mistake that this defendant made was even letting the cops into his home without a warrant. I Would NEVER Do That.
    [email protected]

  • Enoxh

    The Wisconsin Supreme Court is a blight on America. This will be overturned. These people should all be fired. They have no business interpreting the Constitution.

  • Steven Elizabeth

    My name is Steven Elizabeth from Scotland want to testify about a great spell caster that help me cast a spell that bring my husband back to me without any delay. I broke up with him with just little misunderstanding hoping we will get back shortly,but things was growing worse until i contacted Dr.Manbela who help me with his historical powers to bring him back, i have never believed in a spell caster until i come across him, it will be of great sin if i should go out from here without dropping the contact of this great spell caster, in case you need the help of this great spell caster you can contact him through his email: once you contact him all your problems will be over ,once again i say very big thanks to you sir for helping me to recover my husband back, and please sir keep your good work because people need your help and in their lives ,once more thank you Dr Manbela

    Have a good day.

    contact him via; [email protected]

  • Brian Jakimczyk

    Isn’t there a federal question here? The State Supreme Court does not have the ability to override the Federal Constitution. If challenged, this should rise to SCOTUS and, based on the Supremacy Clause and the unconstitutionality of the ruling, be quickly overruled. Thoughts?

  • jsteele98

    Constitution? We don’t need no stinking Constitution we have judges and cops to take care of us.

  • David Wilke

    Since nobody here knows constitutional law, Let’s get something straight here, he invited them into the house, saw blood, weed, and admitted to felon assault to another human (law does not dictate family to be excluded for assualt by another family member). Right now, they have three felon acts, from this point they can dig up the whole property if they believed there was evidence dictating to do so would find more felonous acts. When he invited them in, he gave total authority, then admitted to felonous acts of assualt, this alone is enough to search any vehicle, property that you are in control of. This news article is misrepresentive of any constitutional law.

  • Frank Murphy

    Uh, where is the term “community caretaker” in the Constitution or Bill of Rights?

  • betonit

    “the decision was made by a single, newly-appointed judge…” This is factually incorrect. As stated in the body of the article, the decision was 4 to 3.

  • Northcalgreens

    this is obviously unconstitutional. I hope the voters ke ure they get rid of those that voted for this along with te judge.

  • John Redman

    Anyone, anyone, badge or no, guns or no, comes into my home and I’ll perforate them. If I so much as see a badge wearing retard on my property and I didn’t call them, I’ll open fire Lawfully. There are these things called “Rights”, they are Inalienable. The Inalienable Right to Self Defense against Loss, Harm and Deceit will be applied with Extreme Prejudice at all times. My Rights come from Self-Determination. They aren’t ideas to be waived by gun toting retards at their leisure. And I pray I never have to prove it, because I have the firepower and training to make it a spectacular lesson. Sic Semper Tyrannis. Oh, and Fuck the Police.

  • Mac Sterling

    Anyone not think that this wil go to the Federal Courts? This report was written about a year ago when Hillary was the president-elect. It would have been the case to declarethat the 4th ammendment to the constitution was unconstitutional. Thank goodness Trump was elected.

  • Violuthier

    Yet another state that I’ll refrain from buying anything that’s produced there.

  • Gaylen Anderson

    Hmm Wonder if I could make money as a door to door uzi salesman in Wisconsin about now!

  • acb550

    Please go to SCOTUS. Please let there be a reasonable 5th or more voice on SCOTUS to overturn this travesty

  • Ken Lo

    LAnd of the fee, home of the caged.
    They probably have private prisons that need to be filled, as per contract agreement.

  • Nick Mayo

    That’s why we have The Second Amendment. It’s there to give citizens to protect private residences from corrupt cops

  • silaxo1

    I have a feeling there is more to this story. There is nothing in this story that says the police can enter a residence to search for contraband without a warrant. This story is written to make people not expert or familiar with the law and the Constitution to believe that warrants are no longer needed. With the information provided in this story, I don’t see how the police could enter that room without a search warrant. If there was evidence that there could be somebody injured in that room, then the police had every right to enter that room. That evidence could be blood or information from the brother or other witnesses. That is called exigent circumstances. Since there are three justices who found the entrance illegal is certainly lends one to believe there was no exigent circumstances. One person herein says that anyone (I assume that means the Police) should be met with deadly force. That’s not a smart idea, particularly since most people don’t know the nuances of the law. There is no way to come out winners taking action like that.

  • rivory

    Here it comes …our Constitution is being dismantled piece by piece.

  • anthonydewar420

    How is this not against the 14th amendment?


    it starts in small increments nibbling away at your rights and freedoms.
    Till you live in camps or a militant fascist regime.
    Later people will ask, How did it even GET this way?
    This is how it Gets that way.

  • Michelle Hensley

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/43822c5b14b89f8de596f6f096d80d981e307fa21b023c6aae47f17816befb7a.jpg The Hensley Case #7
    Three very loved sisters were stolen under the umbrella of the state, by Ohio case manager #OHTBaileyCM.
    Documentation proves that the Case Manager did not follow the Federal Funding contract as required by Law. A recent ruling from the California Court of Appeals (9th circuit) reiterates that it is illegal to lie when removing children.
    The Hensley family has no criminal history, no history of drug use and no history of abusing their three nieces. The Hensley families case is currently awaiting a review.

  • Ashley Nicole Swafford

    The Swafford’s Case


    Between March 2016 and current, Ashley and her husband Andrew have experienced severe harassment by Hancock Counties DCS and DCS Case Manager Rachel Fulton. A false, annoymous report subsequently lead to they removal of all 6 of their children without a warrant, on the precipice that one of their children was being neglected because he was being fed with donor breast milk. (The child has multiple special diagnoses.) Even after the initial wellness check on their youngest child by Riley Hospital For Children, Rachel Fulton (#InRFultonCM) (the assessing DCS Case Manager) filed a police report with the Hancock County Sheriff’s Department on allegations of neglect. Both parents were then falsely arrested on Felony charges. In August 2016 Ashley and Andrew conceded to a plea bargain after they were coerced. They were threatened with additional criminal charges if they did not agree to the plea bargains.

    Ashley and Andrew were  in THV (trial home visit) for nearly 6 months. They had no safety plan, no signed case plan and no services in place. Hancock County Department Of Child Services communicated for weeks that they would be filing for case closure. However, it took nearly a month for the motion to be filed. As of December 6, 2016 the case was officially closed.

    Additionally, they received information in October that the original assessing Case Manager, Rachel Fulton was fired from DCS for falsifying information in regards to the Swafford case.

    #HancockCountyDCS #CaughtRedHanded https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e9f420d3a045d224d3fcf16250b651fdd0861d39a64006ae73634143a6fe4020.jpg