Creates a civil cause of action against certain individuals who under color of law enter certain property without a warrant or an exception to the warrant requirement.
Summary
HB 4114 creates a new civil cause of action for people who own, occupy, or are lawfully present on certain property and have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The bill applies when an individual acting under color of law enters that property without a warrant issued by a court, unless a recognized exception to the warrant requirement applies. Covered property includes homes and other buildings, land and curtilage, vehicles in private settings, houses of worship, schools, medical facilities, and other places where privacy is reasonably expected.
A prevailing plaintiff may recover actual economic and noneconomic damages, equitable relief, and other appropriate relief. The bill also requires courts to award reasonable attorney fees and costs to prevailing plaintiffs, while allowing fees to defendants only for frivolous claims. It bars actions against persons already subject to suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, including law enforcement agencies and officers as defined in Oregon law, and imposes a two-year statute of limitations. The act takes effect immediately as an emergency measure.
Impact
The bill adds a state-law civil remedy that supplements existing constitutional and federal civil-rights protections by allowing private lawsuits for warrantless entries by persons acting under color of law in specified private or sensitive locations. It affects law enforcement operations and other government actors by increasing potential civil liability for unlawful entries, while expressly excluding claims against defendants already covered by federal civil-rights suits under 42 U.S.C. 1983, including law enforcement agencies and officers. The measure also shifts litigation incentives by mandating attorney fee awards for prevailing plaintiffs and setting a two-year filing deadline.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have had mixed but ultimately favorable support. It advanced through committee in both chambers and passed the House and Senate on third reading, but the votes on minority report motions show notable opposition, especially in the Senate where the motion to substitute the minority report failed 18-11. The final passage votes suggest the measure had enough support to become law, but not without significant disagreement over its approach to civil liability and law enforcement conduct.
Contention
The main point of contention is the creation of a new state civil cause of action for warrantless entry by government actors, which critics likely viewed as expanding liability and potentially affecting police and other officials performing duties under color of law. Supporters appear to have emphasized privacy protections for homes, houses of worship, schools, medical facilities, and other sensitive places, as well as accountability when no warrant or exception exists. Another likely point of debate is the bill’s exclusion of defendants already subject to 42 U.S.C. 1983, which narrows the scope of the new remedy and may have been intended to avoid overlap with existing civil-rights litigation.
Proposing an amendment to the Oregon Constitution relating to excluding partial exemptions and property tax credits from the requirement of redetermining the maximum assessed value of property granted exemption or credit.