Your Boat and the 4th Amendment . . .

[PaulyB]

I think the big thing here is that no one has ever challenged it, because it is law. The fact that someone challenged it recently and won, I think other states will have to follow suit and change their laws. Ultimately it may make it up to the Supreme Court and a decision will be made. The law of the land is the US Constitution, and just because a state law says that they can do it, doesn't make the law constitutional.

http://abc27.com/2017/08/23/random-boat-inspections-deemed-unconstitutional-by-court/

 

[bronze_10]

@PaulyB thats about how i expected the issue to go with local and state leo. But the coast gaurd seem to be in a totally different realm. I wonder if anyone had ever challenged the cg authority in court.

 

[Gym]

Although I find this getting close to the political IED I find this to be an Interesting subject worthy of discussion for educational purposes.

I have always maintained that police, weather on land or at sea, can enter a property without a warrant if they perceive a life threatening condition exists. This is much more possible on water and especially off shore in international waters.

An argument for safety can always be made on water but is sometimes taken advantage of on land. I believe the same rules apply to aircraft.

 

[0627Devildog]

@PaulyB thats about how i expected the issue to go with local and state leo. But the coast gaurd seem to be in a totally different realm. I wonder if anyone had ever challenged the cg authority in court.

They have. . . .however when you're trying to appeal because you got caught with 2 tons of Marijuana on board you're less likely to get sympathy from SCOTUS. Read the article when you get a chance. Very eye opening and informative.

 

[0627Devildog]

Although I find this getting close to the political IED I find this to be an Interesting subject worthy of discussion for educational purposes.

Agreed. . . .I hesitated in posting it because of how close to the line it may be viewed. But I felt the educational opportunity was too great not to post. I am one of the Honestly not sure votes because before I read that article which opened my eyes to the subject I wasn't entirely certain.

 

[PaulyB]

I don't think the authority will ever be taken away from the Coast Guard, I am referring to law enforcement excluding the Coast Guard. According to the constitution, law enforcement, excluding the Coast Guard, can do warrantless searches only when an exigent circumstance exists and they must articulate why that exigent circumstance applied.

The basis of a exigent circumstance: circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that entry (or other relevant prompt action) was necessary to prevent physical harm to the officers or other persons, the destruction of relevant evidence, the escape of the suspect, or some other consequence improperly frustrating legitimate law enforcement efforts .

Keep in mind, for an exigent circumstance to exist, you must first have probable cause of a crime being committed.

 

[fireflymedic]

OMG I can't believe this has not ended in a tearable way. It's one thing if you're underway but the link talk's about the cg boarded every boat that was mored at an arena at 2 am without announcing the boarding the owner just heard footsteps on his Deck. I'm affraid I would have confronted them with a gun. And the stories of cg ship following you with no lights and not answering radio calls just sounds crazy in this day of pirates.

 

[Betik]

Finally something for me to disagree with @swatski ....
The 4th is applicable on the boat just as it is on any other vehicle. However all governments will get away with anything they can. When it comes to CG it is seen more like a protection force than a policing force; people like them and hence do not think that any of their rights are violated.


My personal believe for the boat is just as any other vehicle or house. There should be a simple way for the owner to choose if he/she is okay with searches without a probable cause. In the boat example, we could have a certain flag incdicating that CG is welcome anytime they want to board. People who have certain characteristics should volunteer themselves to seaches because that is the most efficient way to get rid of the stereotype.

For example, I meet the majority of the stereotypes for jihadi ( looks, ascent, age group), but the truth is that I am the furthest it can get from such an attifute. And as far as I am concern the NSA/local PD can move in my spare bedroom. As long as thread exists, we who look the part should go above and beyond to support the protective agencies. My neighbor who grew up in Nebraska must keep the NSA out of his house and keep eye on them while they are stationed in my home. But I , who escaped from a real oppressive government, have an obligation higher than any other US citizen to souport any protective agencies and the safety of this land.
I cannot stand those ungrateful assholes who spend the first 20 years of the lives beeing physically abused in the country of birth but whe they arrive in the US they feel verbally abused and offended for being called certain names. How about saying " thank you for calling me ... and not making me disappear without a fair trial".

Mark my words fellow jetboaters this political correctness will lead us to a point where people will interpret a jury of their peers, where "peers" = someoneone with my own cultural background and set of believes.

Sorry got a bit sidetracked and off topic.

PS @Julian please feel free to axe my post if it is too political.

 

[Ronnie]

I voted "Of Course" being an active member of the CA state bar for almost 20 years now. After reading the article I realized that I didn't know $hit and just assumed the 4th amendment applied to boats.

Very few of the places I boat in have any coast guard presence at all and I have never been boarded at those places that do. Maybe it was just dumb luck, i dont know, but being a minority a learned a long time ago in the "school of hard knocks" that when a person with a badge and a gun, possibly a night stick and/or tazer asks or tells me to do something the best possible outcome will be had if i just do it. Complaining about it after the event wont change anything but complaing or resisting during the event can make things much worse.

 

[0627Devildog]

I voted "Of Course" being an active member of the CA state bar for almost 20 years now. After reading the article I realized that I didn't know $hit and just assumed the 4th amendment applied to boats.

It sounds like it was just as informative to you as it was me. . . . .

 

[Julian]

I've read it before....and it is something that needs to change with the times. I'm pretty certain that the CG now has the tech to track every boat in coastal waters that enters from foreign waters...and if it doesn't now...it will soon! But it is hard to give up power when you have it.

 

[Jp207]

ok so i wanted to stay silent and see what came of this thread! So i voted i don't know but i will admit i talked my brother who is a LEO for the coast guard. So after talking to him this is what i understand about my fourth amendment rights! The fact that we have vessels on the water opens us up to an easier avenue for search. While if a police officer pulls us over in our car for a tail light and asks to search the vehicle you say no and thats it. The coast guard can board your boat under the safety check and then when they ask you to show them the life jackets, the flares, the whistle, or any other required safety equipment they gain access to any compartment those things are stored in. So they operate on the plain view doctrine and the two prong test. Is an officer legally present and is it readily apparent as evidence. If you are in waters they patrol this applies always. At any time they can stop you under the assumption of a safety check but quickly gain access to any compartment required safety equipment is stored. At which point refusal to show them safety equipment is probable cause. After talking to him at length he said most states game wardens or inland and fisheries officers are allowed so many safety stops backed by the coast guard legally. Meaning that the federal government will stand behind those stops and support them legally til the end. Now as far as boats go coming from international waters they are allowed to be stopped and searched at any time. So long as your an citizen of the united states in international waters or territorial waters your fourth amendment will always apply! But the farther out you go or the bigger the vessel the more you are open to more invasive checks! Anytime you are boarded the first thing they will do is an initial safety check to insure the safety of the boarding party. The bigger the vessel the more invasive this becomes. Your talking the bilges the engine room and more. So i will tell you that your fourth amendment rights apply on your boat but that the coast guard can leverage their ability to search more compartments on your boat then a local LEO. Please chime in if i have said anything that doesnt make sense or if we need more clarification.

 

[Petey14]

Hey guys new to the site but, active duty in the coast guard and over 6 years of boarding officer experiance... would love to help answer your questions to the best of my ability without jeopardizing my career... let me know because I'm a big believer in the Bill of Rights and hope that I can help keep you educated

 

[Petey14]

I would like to assert my general thesis for any replies that may follow in regards to reading this article.
We are not stopping a cars with breakdown lanes and areas to safely stop and evacuate. As all of you know your in the middle of the water, with no safety nets. No shoulder, no restitute of safety, if you need to ditch in the water because of sinking, fire, engine failure, beset by weather, or any of the other million things that could and probably will eventually will go wrong, the only answer is preparedness. That's all I need to say I would hope about that, but if you'd like me to dive deeper I most certainly can and will.
The article points out his more cheerful engagement was after he was allowed to return to the dock after breaking the law... let me say that again... breaking the law. You have a responsibility to play by the rules same as we do, but you all should be upset that you set the example of having all laws accounted for and he didn't. If you don't like that or other laws that's fine, but there's ways to have those grievances heard and it's certainly not while your breaking that law.
We as ( as jp207 put it) LEOs also have an inherent responsibility to uphold that law with discretion and dignity. The judgement to allow the infraction to continue to the dock only further justifies the officers ability to identify a situation, evaluate the options and show compassion for the law being broken.
At least from my point of view, the fact that I have/had authority and jurisdiction to pull you over, only adds to the weight of responsibility I have to protect your 4th amendment right as a law abiding citizen and law enforcement officer.

 

[bronze_10]

thank you for your service @Petey14

 

[Chip F.]

I voted of coarse also. It just seems to me that the protections are granted in the 4th and you would need a boatload of money to prove you had them !

 

[Gym]

One thing to consider...Your house sits on private property. Your boat sits in government property. This distinction may give the CG broader power.

 

[0627Devildog]

One thing to consider...Your house sits on private property. Your boat sits in government property. This distinction may give the CG broader power.

However, your car is on public property while driving, and the police powers aren't nearly as broad as the USGC.

 

[Ancient canoe]

However, your car is on public property while driving, and the police powers aren't nearly as broad as the USGC.

I would consider USCG more in the lines of border patrol than a police search. That being said everyone owns a vehicle and travels only a small % own boats. Vehicle searches are going to be tested in the courts a lot more than boat searches.

 

[fireflymedic]

I feel sorry for people that live on a house boats they've given up the most.