Outside Legal Counsel Secures Another Fourth Amendment Victory, Extending Prior Sixth Circuit Win to Township Code Enforcement

Outside Legal Counsel PLC has secured a federal consent judgment against Aurelius Township that permanently bars warrantless property inspections and reinforces constitutional limits on local code enforcement — building directly on the firm’s earlier landmark Fourth Amendment victory in Mockeridge v. Harvey.

The judgment, entered by U.S. District Judge Jane M. Beckering, prohibits Aurelius Township and its officials from entering private property without a judicial warrant, valid consent, or a recognized exigent circumstance. The protections apply not only to the named property owners, John and Betty Argersinger, but run with the land and bind the Township as to all future occupants.

This ruling follows Outside Legal Counsel’s earlier success in Mockeridge v. Harvey, where the law firm established that government officials may not use regulatory authority as a substitute for a warrant — a decision that has become a touchstone in Michigan Fourth Amendment litigation involving administrative searches and inspections.

“Zoning enforcement is not a loophole,” states Philip L. Ellison of Outside Legal Counsel PLC. "The Fourth Amendment always governs."

The Aurelius Township case arose after township officials entered the Argersingers’ rural property without a warrant to conduct zoning and ordinance inspections. That conduct led to a federal civil-rights lawsuit alleging unconstitutional searches — a claim the Township ultimately conceded by consent judgment rather than litigation on the merits.

The federal judgment comes amid increasing public scrutiny of local governments that treat code enforcement as an excuse to bypass constitutional safeguards - a practice highlighted in recent reporting on similar disputes involving private property owners and rural property holders across Michigan.

Outside Legal Counsel PLC continues to litigate Fourth Amendment administrative search cases statewide and in federal court, with a growing body of precedent confirming that regulatory authority does not override constitutional limits.

More information about the firm’s Fourth Amendment practice is available at NoWarrant.com.