reason.com Open in urlscan Pro
75.2.24.81  Public Scan

URL: https://reason.com/2024/05/10/a-swat-team-blew-up-this-innocent-couples-home-and-left-them-with-the-bill-was-that-c...
Submission: On May 27 via manual from US — Scanned from US

Form analysis 3 forms found in the DOM

GET https://reason.com/

<form role="search" method="get" class="search-form" action="https://reason.com/">
  <label>
    <span class="screen-reader-text">Search for:</span>
    <input type="search" class="search-field" placeholder="Search …" value="" name="s">
  </label>
  <input type="submit" class="search-submit" value="Search">
</form>

POST

<form method="post" id="gform_0" class="recaptcha-v3-initialized"><input type="hidden" name="login_redirect" value="/2024/05/10/a-swat-team-blew-up-this-innocent-couples-home-and-left-them-with-the-bill-was-that-constitutional/">
  <div class="gform_heading">
    <h3 class="gform_title">Login Form</h3>
  </div>
  <div class="gform_body">
    <div id="gform_fields_login" class="gform_fields top_label">
      <div id="field_0_1" class="gfield gfield--type-text gfield_contains_required field_sublabel_below gfield--no-description field_description_below field_validation_below gfield_visibility_visible" data-js-reload="field_0_1"><label
          class="gfield_label gform-field-label" for="input_1">Username<span class="gfield_required"><span class="gfield_required gfield_required_text">(Required)</span></span></label>
        <div class="ginput_container ginput_container_text"><input name="input_1" id="input_1" type="text" value="" class="" aria-required="true" aria-invalid="false"> </div>
      </div>
      <div id="field_0_2" class="gfield gfield--type-password gfield_contains_required field_sublabel_below gfield--no-description field_description_below field_validation_below gfield_visibility_visible" data-js-reload="field_0_2"><label
          class="gfield_label gform-field-label gfield_label_before_complex" for="input_2">Password<span class="gfield_required"><span class="gfield_required gfield_required_text">(Required)</span></span></label>
        <div class="ginput_container ginput_container_password">
          <span id="input_2_1_container" class="ginput_password ">
            <span class="password_input_container">
              <input type="password" name="input_2" id="input_2" value="" aria-required="true" aria-invalid="false">
              <button type="button" class="gform_show_password gform-theme-button gform-theme-button--simple" onclick="javascript:gformToggleShowPassword(&quot;input_2&quot;);" aria-live="polite" aria-label="Show Password"
                data-label-show="Show Password" data-label-hide="Hide Password"><span class="dashicons dashicons-hidden" aria-hidden="true"></span></button>
            </span>
          </span>
          <div class="gf_clear gf_clear_complex"></div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div id="field_0_3" class="gfield gfield--type-remember_me field_sublabel_below gfield--no-description field_description_below hidden_label field_validation_below gfield_visibility_visible" data-js-reload="field_0_3"><label
          class="gfield_label gform-field-label screen-reader-text gfield_label_before_complex"></label>
        <div class="ginput_container ginput_container_checkbox">
          <div class="gfield_checkbox" id="input_3">
            <div class="gchoice gchoice_3">
              <input class="gfield-choice-input" name="input_3.1" type="checkbox" value="1" id="choice_3">
              <label for="choice_3" id="label_3">Remember Me</label>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="gform_footer top_label"> <button type="submit" id="gform_submit_button_0" class="gform_button button"
      onclick="if(window[&quot;gf_submitting_0&quot;]){return false;}  if( !jQuery(&quot;#gform_0&quot;)[0].checkValidity || jQuery(&quot;#gform_0&quot;)[0].checkValidity()){window[&quot;gf_submitting_0&quot;]=true;}  "
      onkeypress="if( event.keyCode == 13 ){ if(window[&quot;gf_submitting_0&quot;]){return false;} if( !jQuery(&quot;#gform_0&quot;)[0].checkValidity || jQuery(&quot;#gform_0&quot;)[0].checkValidity()){window[&quot;gf_submitting_0&quot;]=true;}  jQuery(&quot;#gform_0&quot;).trigger(&quot;submit&quot;,[true]); }">Login</button>
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="is_submit_0" value="1">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_submit" value="0">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_unique_id" value="">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="state_0" value="WyJbXSIsIjVmZDk0MDRiMTc0NTYwODJmYTIwNGZlZDYxN2ViYzJjIl0=">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_target_page_number_0" id="gform_target_page_number_0" value="0">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_source_page_number_0" id="gform_source_page_number_0" value="1">
    <input type="hidden" name="gform_field_values" value="">
  </div>
</form>

POST /2024/05/10/a-swat-team-blew-up-this-innocent-couples-home-and-left-them-with-the-bill-was-that-constitutional/#gf_17

<form method="post" enctype="multipart/form-data" target="gform_ajax_frame_17" id="gform_17" class="puprf-signup-widget recaptcha-v3-initialized"
  action="/2024/05/10/a-swat-team-blew-up-this-innocent-couples-home-and-left-them-with-the-bill-was-that-constitutional/#gf_17" data-formid="17" novalidate="">
  <div class="gf_invisible ginput_recaptchav3" data-sitekey="6LeMnkUaAAAAALL8T1-XAyB7vxpOeTExu6KwR48-" data-tabindex="0"><input id="input_d9d5df2d7c27fc09225ea9b621d86ba4" class="gfield_recaptcha_response" type="hidden"
      name="input_d9d5df2d7c27fc09225ea9b621d86ba4" value=""></div>
  <div class="gform-body gform_body">
    <div id="gform_fields_17" class="gform_fields top_label form_sublabel_below description_below validation_below">
      <div id="field_17_1" class="gfield gfield--type-email gfield_contains_required field_sublabel_below gfield--no-description field_description_below hidden_label field_validation_below gfield_visibility_visible" data-js-reload="field_17_1"><label
          class="gfield_label gform-field-label" for="input_17_1">Email<span class="gfield_required"><span class="gfield_required gfield_required_text">(Required)</span></span></label>
        <div class="ginput_container ginput_container_email">
          <input name="input_1" id="input_17_1" type="email" value="" class="large" placeholder="Email Address" aria-required="true" aria-invalid="false">
        </div>
      </div>
      <div id="field_17_2" class="gfield gfield--type-honeypot gform_validation_container field_sublabel_below gfield--has-description field_description_below field_validation_below gfield_visibility_visible" data-js-reload="field_17_2"><label
          class="gfield_label gform-field-label" for="input_17_2">Email</label>
        <div class="ginput_container"><input name="input_2" id="input_17_2" type="text" value="" autocomplete="new-password"></div>
        <div class="gfield_description" id="gfield_description_17_2">This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.</div>
      </div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="gform_footer top_label"> <button type="submit" id="gform_submit_button_17" class="gform_button button"
      onclick="if(window[&quot;gf_submitting_17&quot;]){return false;}  if( !jQuery(&quot;#gform_17&quot;)[0].checkValidity || jQuery(&quot;#gform_17&quot;)[0].checkValidity()){window[&quot;gf_submitting_17&quot;]=true;}  "
      onkeypress="if( event.keyCode == 13 ){ if(window[&quot;gf_submitting_17&quot;]){return false;} if( !jQuery(&quot;#gform_17&quot;)[0].checkValidity || jQuery(&quot;#gform_17&quot;)[0].checkValidity()){window[&quot;gf_submitting_17&quot;]=true;}  jQuery(&quot;#gform_17&quot;).trigger(&quot;submit&quot;,[true]); }">Submit</button>
    <input type="hidden" name="gform_ajax" value="form_id=17&amp;title=&amp;description=1&amp;tabindex=0&amp;theme=gravity-theme">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="is_submit_17" value="1">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_submit" value="17">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_unique_id" value="">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="state_17" value="WyJbXSIsIjVmZDk0MDRiMTc0NTYwODJmYTIwNGZlZDYxN2ViYzJjIl0=">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_target_page_number_17" id="gform_target_page_number_17" value="0">
    <input type="hidden" class="gform_hidden" name="gform_source_page_number_17" id="gform_source_page_number_17" value="1">
    <input type="hidden" name="gform_field_values" value="">
  </div>
  <p style="display: none !important;" class="akismet-fields-container" data-prefix="ak_"><label>Δ<textarea name="ak_hp_textarea" cols="45" rows="8" maxlength="100"></textarea></label><input type="hidden" id="ak_js_1" name="ak_js"
      value="1716848495977">
    <script>
      document.getElementById("ak_js_1").setAttribute("value", (new Date()).getTime());
    </script>
  </p>
</form>

Text Content

 * Latest
 * Magazine
   * Current Issue
   * Archives
   * Subscribe
   * Crossword
 * Video
 * Podcasts
   * All Shows
   * The Reason Roundtable
   * The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
   * The Soho Forum Debates
   * Just Asking Questions
   * The Best of Reason Magazine
   * Why We Can't Have Nice Things
 * Volokh
 * Newsletters
 * Donate
   * Donate Online
   * Donate Crypto
   * Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
   * Torchbearer Society
   * Planned Giving
 * Subscribe
   * Reason Plus Subscription
   * Print Subscription

Search for:


LOGIN FORM

Username(Required)

Password(Required)

Remember Me
Login
Create new account
Forgot password


Government abuse


A SWAT TEAM BLEW UP THIS INNOCENT COUPLE'S HOME AND LEFT THEM WITH THE BILL. WAS
THAT CONSTITUTIONAL?


MOLLIE AND MICHAEL SLAYBAUGH ARE REPORTEDLY OUT OVER $70,000. THE GOVERNMENT
SAYS IT IS IMMUNE.

Billy Binion | 5.10.2024 4:41 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly
versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
(Illustration: Lex Villena; Midjourney)

A federal court yesterday heard arguments in an appeal concerning an area of law
that, while niche, has seen a streak of similarly situated plaintiffs pile up in
recent years. At stake: When a SWAT team destroys an innocent person's property,
should the owner be strapped with the bill?

There is what I would consider a commonsense answer to that question. But in a
reminder that common sense does not always guide law and policy, that is not the
answer reached by several courts across the U.S., where such victims are
sometimes told that "police powers" provide an exception to the Constitution's
promise to give just compensation when the government usurps property for public
use.

It remains to be seen where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit will
fall as it evaluates the complaint from Mollie and Michael Slaybaugh, who are
reportedly on the hook for over $70,000 after a SWAT team destroyed much of
their home in Smyrna, Tennessee.

Powered By

00:00/01:42
10 Sec


Home Depot Sees Sales Drop for Sixth Straight Quarter




Next
Stay





In January 2022, Mollie Slaybaugh stepped outside her house and was greeted by a
police officer with his gun drawn. She was informed that her adult son, James
Jackson Conn—who did not live with her but had recently arrived to visit—was
wanted for questioning concerning the murder of a police officer, which she says
was news to her. Although she offered to speak to Conn and bring him out of her
house, law enforcement declined to permit that, or to let her re-enter at all,
so she went to stay at her daughter's house nearby.

The next day, police broke down the door and launched dozens of tear gas
grenades into the Slaybaughs' home, laying waste to nearly everything in the
house. Their insurance declined to assist them, as their policy—like many
policies—does not cover damage caused by the government. Yet both Smyrna and
Rutherford County said they were immune from helping as well.

But despite Mollie Slaybaugh's offer to coax Conn out sans tear gas, her
complaint does not dispute that it was in the best interest of the community for
law enforcement to do as they did that day. It merely contests the government's
claim that innocent property owners should have to bear the financial burden by
themselves when police destroy their homes in pursuit of a suspect.

"Law enforcement is a public good. Through our taxes, we pay for the training,
equipment, and salaries of police officers. We pay to incarcerate criminals. We
pay for a court system and public defenders," reads her complaint. "When the
police destroy private property in the course of enforcing the criminal laws,
that is simply another cost of law enforcement. Forcing random, innocent
individuals to shoulder that cost alone would be as fair as conducting a lottery
to determine who has to pay the police chief's salary each year."



That hypothetical is absurd. And yet the spirit of it is at the heart of several
court decisions on the matter. That includes the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Tennessee, which ruled last year that the Slaybaughs were not
entitled to a payout because, in the court's view, the Takings Clause of the
Fifth Amendment does not apply when the state seizes and destroys someone's
property in the exercise of "police powers."

The Slaybaughs are unfortunately not alone. The notion that "police powers"
immunize the government from liability is what doomed Leo Lech's lawsuit, which
he filed after a SWAT team did so much damage to his home—in pursuit of a
suspect that broke in and had no relation to the family—that it had to be
demolished. In 2020, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

Similar claims are continuing to accumulate. The city of Los Angeles refused to
compensate Carlos Pena after a SWAT team destroyed his North Hollywood print
shop in pursuit of a suspect who barricaded himself inside, and the government
in McKinney, Texas, turned away Vicki Baker after police ruined her home and
much of its contents while, again, trying to catch a fugitive. After a legal
odyssey of sorts, Baker was able to secure a judgment from a federal jury—though
that was ultimately overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit,
which ruled there was a "necessity" exception to the Takings Clause. Most
recently, the local government in South Bend, Indiana, rejected Amy Hadley's
pleas for help after police mutilated her home in search of a suspect she'd
never met and who'd never been to her home. An officer's botched investigation
led law enforcement to her house, and she has been forced to pay the price of
that blunder. Accountability should not just be for the little people.



"The plain text of the Just Compensation Clause contains no exemptions for the
police power, for public necessity, or for damage done by law enforcement. And
the government bears the burden of establishing that any such exception is
grounded in our nation's history and tradition," Jeffrey Redfern, an attorney
with the Institute for Justice representing the Slaybaughs, told the 6th Circuit
yesterday. "But the government hasn't even tried to meet that burden. Instead it
asks this court to blindly follow decisions from other jurisdictions—decisions
whose reasoning the government isn't really defending."

In some sense, the government is throwing what it can at the wall to see what
sticks. And a fair amount of nonadhesive material is successfully latching on—an
exception to the laws of nature that few entities other than the government
could reasonably hope to enjoy.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and
trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

Email(Required)

Email

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Submit

Δ

NEXT: The Details of Stormy Daniels' Story About Sex With Trump Are Legally
Irrelevant

Billy Binion is an associate editor at Reason.

Government abusePolice AbuseSWATPoliceCriminal JusticeCrimeLawsuitsLaw &
GovernmentLaw enforcementTennesseeCourtsFederal CourtsHomeownersTakingsFifth
AmendmentMoneyAccountability
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly
versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (77)


LATEST

IN HAWAII, PERMISSION TO USE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PRECLUDES PERMISSION TO OWN A GUN

Jacob Sullum | 5.27.2024 3:35 PM

K-12 SCHOOLS CRIPPLED BY COVID CASH

Aaron Garth Smith | 5.27.2024 8:00 AM

AUSTRALIANS ABANDON PHYSICAL CASH AND THE FREEDOM IT PROTECTS

J.D. Tuccille | 5.27.2024 7:00 AM

ARCHIVES: JUNE 2024

Reason Staff | From the June 2024 issue

6 AI LIFE HACKS YOU CAN USE RIGHT NOW

Varad Raigaonkar | From the June 2024 issue





 * About
 * Browse Topics
 * Events
 * Staff
 * Jobs
 * Donate
 * Advertise
 * Subscribe
 * Contact
 * Media
 * Shop
 * Amazon

Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple
PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of
Service apply.



Notifications