However all the game wardens I know aren’t looking to just randomly harass people. There is usually a good reason when they go after someone, like shooting from a motor vehicle on the road.
I understand that English common law may have this notion of “lease holding” (if you buy property in the UK you’re technically renting it for 999 years from the queen). However, America is not England and in this country you actually own your property (and in many states can defend it with lethal force). So where is this authority coming from?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The crux of the 4th Am. is reasonableness. A warrantless search of your home is presumptively unreasonable and can only be performed in very certain exigent circumstances. Most of these are emergencies. Say your house is on fire, the firepeople can enter to put it out, without a warrant, and if they see your mountain of cocaine while they are in there, you're fucked.
A game warden wanting to check your freezer is not an exigent circumstance that would bypass the warrant requirement. A game warden could easily go to a judge and get a warrant by showing the judge probable cause to believe you are doing something naughty.
So, I call bullshit.
I could be wrong in my recollections, I really should read the book. The one about Britain certainly was fascinating.
Still, on the law in question, I wouldn't be surprised if the (common) law upholds the right simply because it's never been challenged or re-legislated.
Then there is the land that is in the direct possession of the "Crown". The "Crown" is just a technical legal word which means the British State, stemming from times of absolute monarchy when the State and the Monarch were one and the same. But that has been abolished over the centuries and only this vestige remains. An example of land owned by the Crown/State would be Buckingham Palace or the White House.
Lastly there is private land. This is not owned by the Queen nor is it owned by the State. Yes the law provides that the State can take back land into its possession but this right exists in both the US and UK. In the UK it is called compulsory purchase and in the US it is called eminent domain.
The main practical difference is that the US has a constitutional right of privacy whereas the UK does not. The British Parliament is unrestricted in what it can take from you but the Queen cannot simply saunter onto your land and start playing croquet.
This thread is teaching me a lot too, so I can’t directly answer your question as it pertains to State game wardens, but something to keep in mind with the framing of your question is that the States are not covered by Article II of the US Constitution. Article II speaks to the authority of the Executive power of the United States, which is the President, but the States are not subordinate to the President and neither are their officers and employees.
In general in the last century the Supreme Court has interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment as "incorporating" the Bill of Rights. Although the Bill of Rights was originally written to apply specifically to the federal government, the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment has been read as applying these protections to state governments as well.
In particular, in Mapp v. Ohio in 1961 the Supreme Court held that under the Due Process clause the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of arbitrary search and seizure applies to state governments as well.
And no, poached game isn’t “papers and effects.”
Also land patents and allodial title[2] are virtually extinct in the USA. We all are renting our property. Stop paying your “property tax” if you’d like confirmation.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_...
Having to pay taxes on your property invalidates the nature of property no more than paying income tax invalidates the nature of income.
[1] https://www.quora.com/Can-a-game-warden-come-into-your-house...
