Michigan
Michigan Supreme Court allows evidence collected by drone, without a warrant
Last week, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled unanimously that evidence collected illegally could still be used to enforce civil penalties.
Todd and Heather Maxon keep cars on their five-acre property in Long Lake Township. The township sued in 2007, alleging that the Maxons were violating a zoning ordinance by keeping “junk” on the property. When the Maxons fought back, the township agreed to drop the charges and reimburse attorney fees, and in exchange, the Maxons would not expand the number of cars on the property.
Township officials heard that the Maxons’ collection was growing, but the cars were hidden from the road, so they had no way to verify it without a warrant—or so you would think. Instead, officials hired a company to surveil the property with aerial drones on three different occasions. Finding that the collection had indeed expanded, the township sued the Maxons for violating the agreement.
The Maxons filed to suppress the drone evidence as a Fourth Amendment violation, since the township never obtained a warrant. The case made its way to the Michigan Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in October. The court had previously remanded the case back to the Michigan Court of Appeals to determine “whether the exclusionary rule applies to this dispute.” The exclusionary rule holds that evidence obtained illegally cannot be introduced at trial.
Last week, in a unanimous decision, the Michigan Supreme Court sided with the township. “The exclusionary rule may not be applied to civil enforcement proceedings that effectuate local zoning and nuisance ordinances,” wrote Justice Brian Zahra, adding that “the costs of excluding the drone evidence outweighed the benefits of suppressing it.”
“Generally, the exclusionary rule operates to exclude or suppress evidence in certain legal
proceedings if the evidence is obtained in violation of a person’s constitutional rights,” Zahra wrote. “Caselaw, however, has never suggested that the exclusionary rule bars the introduction of illegally seized evidence in all proceedings or against all persons. Given the history of the rule, it is only applicable when the objective of deterring wrongful law enforcement conduct is most effectively met.”
The court of appeals originally determined that the search had violated the Fourth Amendment before the higher court sent it back for further consideration. “Because the Supreme Court limited our review to the exclusionary rule’s role in this dispute, we proceed by assuming that a Fourth Amendment violation occurred,” wrote Chief Judge Elizabeth Gleicher of the Michigan Court of Appeals.
But the state supreme court punted on that issue: “Because the exclusionary rule did not apply in this civil proceeding to enforce zoning and nuisance ordinances,” Zahra wrote, “the Court declined to address whether the use of an aerial drone under the circumstances of this case was an unreasonable search or seizure for purposes of the United States or Michigan Constitutions.”
In other words, the state’s highest court decided that it was irrelevant whether the search violated the Fourth Amendment because the evidence would not be excluded either way, so long as the search was conducted to investigate civil and not criminal violations.
Robert Frommer, an attorney with the Institute for Justice (I.J.), a public-interest law firm that represents the Maxons, calls the Supreme Court’s decision “wrong and dangerous,” saying that it effectively endorsed unconstitutional searches “as long as the person searching does not have a policeman’s hat.”
“The Fourth Amendment is not about the police, it’s about the government,” Frommer tells Reason. “The Michigan Supreme Court failed to act, but the Legislature should fix this loophole to secure Michiganders’ rights.”
Enter your email and we’ll send a secure one-click link to sign in.
WLNS 6 News is provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc., and uses the My Nexstar sign-in, which works across our media network.
Learn more at nexstar.tv/privacy-policy.
WLNS 6 News is provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc., and uses the My Nexstar sign-in, which works across our media network.
Nexstar Media Group, Inc. is a leading, diversified media company that produces and distributes engaging local and national news, sports, and entertainment content across its television and digital platforms. The My Nexstar sign-in works across the Nexstar network—including The CW, NewsNation, The Hill, and more. Learn more at nexstar.tv/privacy-policy.
As temperatures rise in Michigan each summer, so to do the chances of harmful algal blooms (HABs) developing in our lakes, causing a risk to both ecosystems and public health.
HABs are formed wherever there is rapid growth of cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae, which are naturally found in lakes, rivers and ponds. Some cyanobacteria found in blooms contain toxins that can be harmful to people and animals, and often present as blue-green, yellow or brown streaks, foam, or thick paint-like scums on the water surface, according to the Michigan Departments of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE)
To help keep track of these harmful algal blooms across the state, EGLE has teamed up with the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) to update its online reporting form to include harmful algal blooms. Now the public can easily report suspected HABs to the state by filling out the form at Michigan.gov/HABs. Individuals can also make a report by calling EGLE’s Environmental Assistance Center at 800-662-9278.
“This new online form is an easy and efficient way for Michiganders to help monitor and safeguard our water resources,” said Jerrod Sanders, director of Water Resources Division at EGLE, in a news release. “This tool improves efficiency and helps us respond to potential risks more effectively.”
It will also allow EGLE and MDHHS staff to better understand how HABs develop, and creates the potential to send out public notifications about what areas to avoid as a way of keeping people and pets safe when they’re detected.
Breathing in or swallowing water with HAB toxins can cause asthma-like symptoms, difficulty breathing, stomach pain, vomiting, diarrhea, runny eyes and nose, weakness, headaches or dizziness. Skin contact can also cause rashes, blisters or hives.
“If you had contact with or swallowed water with a suspected HAB and feel sick, call your health care provider or seek medical attention as soon as possible,” said Dr. Natasha Bagdasarian, chief medical executive.
Locations of HAB reports verified by EGLE and results of cyanotoxin testing will be displayed on the Michigan Harmful Algal Bloom Reports Map for the public to review.
For more information on health effects, causes and reports on the occurrence of HABs in Michigan lakes, visit Michigan.gov/HABs.
Copyright 2026 by WDIV ClickOnDetroit – All rights reserved.
KALAMAZOO, Mich. — Beach season is here, and Lake Michigan is the most popular of the Great Lakes for swimming. However, it can also be the most dangerous.
According to the Great Lakes Surf Rescue Project, 81 people drowned in the Great Lakes in 2025. 36 of those drownings, or almost half, happened in Lake Michigan.
“Even an Olympic swimmer is not going to swim against the rip current,” Pat Whelan, Plainwell district supervisor for the Michigan DNR Parks and Recreation Division, said.
What makes a rip current so dangerous is the natural instinct to try and swim back to shore. However, it is not the way to escape.
“It’s a term called ‘flip, float, and follow,’ where you flip on your back so you can breathe,” Whelan said. “Follow that, float on the top of that current and follow it out into the lake until you can feel it release you. Then you’re going to swim parallel to the shore, and then the waves themselves will help push you back into the shore.”
It’s been more than 20 years since Andy Fox, 17, drowned in a rip current at Grand Haven State Park, but the pain is still fresh for his mother, Vicki Cech, who rarely goes to the beach.
“When I have company in, sometimes I’ll walk out on the pier, but as a rule I just don’t go there anymore,” Cech said. “Not that beach, because that one does have a lot of sad memories for me.”
Pictured is Andy Fox, 17, in this undated photo. Fox drowned in a rip current at Grand Haven State Park in 2006. (Cech/WWMT)
Compared to other Lake Michigan beaches, Grand Haven State Park has added safety features as conditions are known to change rapidly.
Grand Haven uses the color warning system, but at other beaches, they have flags.
At Grand Haven State Park, however, there is an electronic lighting system on an orange tower. When the life ring on that tower is pulled, Ottawa County dispatch is alerted right away.
Blue towers on the beach are equipped with cameras, providing a video feed of what is happening where the life ring was pulled.
Electric lights instead of flags are used to alert people of swimming conditions at Grand Haven State Park.
“They can push the bottom and actually talk back and forth with central dispatch,” Whelan said.
Alongside these additions, Cech would like to see lifeguards on Grand Haven’s beaches.
“I know there’s all kinds of different things we have down there. Life rings closer to the water and everything like that,” Cech said. “But I’d say the only thing which I see South Haven has finally gotten lifeguards, the ultimate would be lifeguards.”
Michigan got rid of lifeguards at state parks in the 1990’s. The DNR said it was a combination of cost and liability concerns.
South Haven, however, welcomed lifeguards back to the city’s beaches for the first time in 25 years on Monday.
Those lifeguards do not yet have chairs and towers yet, but they will be posted between each flag section, with green, yellow and red colors marking that day’s swimming conditions.
More information about the Great Lakes Surf Rescue Project can be found online.
-
Nevada1 minute agoNevada State Police investigating deadly crash on U.S. 95 Alternate
-
New Hampshire4 minutes agoOpinion: The farm bill passed the House. Western New Hampshire got the bill. – Concord Monitor
-
New Jersey9 minutes agoPolice fire tear gas during protest outside New Jersey ICE facility
-
New Mexico16 minutes agoPatrick Brenner: New Mexico can’t afford permitting paralysis | Carlsbad Current Argus
-
North Carolina19 minutes agoNorth Carolina felon gets 22 years for 15 guns, fentanyl pills, meth and cocaine
-
North Dakota24 minutes agoHow popular is mail-in and absentee voting in North Dakota?
-
Ohio31 minutes agoOhio voters literally can’t believe our eyes. Danger of AI ads not overblown | Letters
-
Oklahoma34 minutes agoOklahoma’s dramatic literacy goals now up to elementary schools to implement
