Court Case

Our Pacific Legal Foundation case, Peter Stavrianoudakis, et al. (Plaintiffs) v. U.S. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Service, et al. (Defendants), is complete. The case was dismissed based on California's request.

California revised its falconry regulations to remove the offensive requirement that applicants/falconers provide a signed certification stating "I understand that my facilities, equipment, or raptors are subject to unannounced inspection pursuant to subsection 670(j), Title 14, of the California Code of Regulations."

California’s argument for dismissal was “A complaint may be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

The court agreed with CDFW even though we argued that the warrantless inspection provision remains in CDFW’s falconry regulations (per USFWS requirements) regardless of the removal of the offensive signed certification provision. The court ignored this. Perhaps the court saw the signed certification removal as voiding any other inspection provision in the falconry regulations since falconers would not agree to it if given a choice, and citizens cannot be forced to give up a constitutional right to practice a benign activity. However, this would have to be tested in court. But I question whether CDFW would want to test this hypothesis.

Time will tell, and Pacific Legal Foundation is open to defending a wronged falconer related to this case. It would reinforce what they have already accomplished. One could only hope that California pushes the envelope since the appellate court agreed that unwarranted falconry inspections appear to violate the Fourth Amendment. The details would then have to be analyzed in a case, since there are activities that do justify unwarranted inspections for health and safety reasons.