Will the Supreme Court hear our Girl Scout test?

Our attorneys want to introduce the “Girl Scout test” to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case is Reel v. North Carolina, and it’s about the Fourth Amendment. Our amicus curiae brief will be about the police practice of “Knock and Talk” at your home. And the questions are…

Will the Supreme Court take up the case? Will they learn about our Girl Scout test?

Here’s the issue: The police come to the door of a home and knock. But…

Sometimes, they don’t leave. The officers might even hang around inside the curtilage after they’ve been asked to depart. Sometimes they get aggressive. They have no warrant, so they hope stalling and pressure will help them convert the visit into a search.

When this happens, we say… The police are engaging in trespass – a violation of Fourth Amendment property rights, especially to be secure in your house.

The late Justice Scalia largely agreed. He said that police access to your porch is the same as….

Trick-or-Treaters or Girl Scouts

Despite Scalia’s instructions, law enforcement employees have been very “resourceful” at persistently sticking around during these Knock and Talks. They…

Stay on the porch after being asked to leave
Peer into the windows of the house and garage
Threaten criminal charges for not opening your door
Knock on the windows
Get a dog to sniff out contraband
Make repeat visits
Show up in the overnight or wee hours
Stick a foot in the door or push it open

Girl Scouts couldn’t do these things!

Yet there’s a reason all of those “police” actions (and more) have happened, repeatedly.

AND YOU ARE THE SOLUTION. That is to say, we have unfinished work.

Until 1968, the Fourth Amendment was based on your property rights. Your person, your house, your papers, and your effects. Seems obvious, doesn’t it?

For the next 44 years, the Fourth Amendment doctrine centered on the “reasonable expectation of privacy.” The argument was that surveillance technology was not as intrusive as 19th-century methods of search. The old rules were “too constraining” on the new policing methods.

But Americans lost in this new deal. With each new technology, the realm of privacy kept shrinking.

So we filed an amicus brief in U.S. v. Jones. We reintroduced the long-lost property basis. And we won!

In that case, and again in another the following year, Florida v. Jardines…

The property basis for the Fourth Amendment was restored!

Indeed, it was in the Jardines case that Scalia mentioned the Girl Scouts.

However, since then, several federal judges or judicial panels, and even the Supremes themselves, have failed to utilize the new Jones doctrine.

When cops at a Knock and Talk fail to behave like Scalia’s Girl Scouts, people get hurt or arrested. Worse, their impolite actions are upheld in courts. And that’s because…

The rules have been unclear. You can fix that.

We believe it is time for the Supreme Court to codify a…

Girl Scout Test: If the purpose is a Knock and Talk, then police should be as respectful as Girl Scouts.

Then everyone, police and judges, would know what the rules are. It’d be a bright line.

We have a unique track record here. We alone presented the property basis in Jones.

We also helped secure a victory in Collins v. Virginia, where the Supreme Court correctly held that the “automobile exception” does not permit officers to enter the curtilage near the home to search a vehicle.

Each time, we identified what others missed. But now, the property doctrine is slipping – and we’re the ones who see it. If we don’t file this brief, will anybody make this Girl Scout argument?

With your help, we have just the case to address these matters…

August 2020. High Point, North Carolina. Police officers suspected that drugs were being sold from a home. The officers argued that they had an “implied license” to approach Quashan Reel’s front door and to execute a “knock and talk” investigatory conversation.

Now, let’s see if the cops passed the Girl Scout test.

When the door was opened to admit a visitor, the police blocked Reel’s attempt to shut it.
These cops claimed they smelled marijuana when the door was opened.
They forced the door open and invaded the house without a warrant.

Let’s see if the courts applied anything like the Girl Scout test.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals was indulgent of this Knock and Talk.
The state’s Supreme Court let the Appeals’ decision slide by without comment.

And we should be the ones to make this case because…

Our amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief for Reel v. North Carolina would be in support of a “petition for certiorari.” That means we want the Supreme Court to agree to hear and rule upon the case.

We’re concerned that if we fail to submit a brief, the problems listed above will not be addressed by any other party, and there will be no brightline standard like the Girl Scout test.

Will you help us file this special brief?

We need one, two, or three lead donors to get us to the first $2,000 – could that be you?

If you can give at any level, that matters too. The average contribution is $55, and it all adds up.

You can also start a monthly pledge.

I Support the Brief

Note: We’re requesting your support via Downsize DC Foundation’s “Zero Aggression Project.” By using the ZAP form, your donation can be tax-deductible.

Set your own agenda,

Jim Babka, President
Agenda Setters by Downsize DC

Today’s Action: Bring the Girl Scout test to the Supreme Court