What is the current state of the law regarding the Fourth Amendment and the right to search and seizure of personal information in the context of an inspection of a residential property?

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens against "unreasonable searches and seizures" of their homes and persons. (Camara v. Municipal Court (1967) 387 U.S. 523, 528.) A governing principle of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is that "a search of private property without proper consent is 'unreasonable' unless it has been authorized by a valid search warrant." (Id. at pp. 528-529 [holding that "administrative searches" of the sort contemplated under the amended ordinance violates the Fourth Amendment unless conducted with proper consent or accompanied by a warrant, see id. at p. 534].) A corollary principle is that "because the ultimate touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is 'reasonableness,' the warrant requirement is subject to certain exceptions. (Citations)."

Page 11

(Brigham City v. Stuart et al. (2006) 547 U.S. 398, 403.) Here, nothing in the language of the amended ordinance offends either the warrant requirement or the Fourth Amendment's requirement of reasonableness. The amended ordinance requires tenant consent before a City inspection can proceed. Absent tenant consent, the City must obtain an inspection warrant. We fail to see how the amended ordinance's good faith requirement violates the Fourth Amendment's prescription of reasonableness.