[horsawlarway]

The 4th explicitly doesn't cover "land".

> right to be secure in their homes, papers, and effects

It also explicitly lays out "unreasonable" as the qualifier. Personally... I don't think he has much of a case to challenge the state wording.

So while I strongly support the 4th amendment, I don't really agree with the guy here. It sounds a lot like he's pissed off the officer by fishing illegally.

My bigger takeaway is that Uber and Lyft are able to automatically dismiss him from a position without consequence for a completely unrelated offense. Even if I think he's completely guilty (and to be clear - I don't) I'm hard pressed to consider "wildlife & game license violation" worthy of impacting a job that involves driving other folks around.

[recursivedoubts]

"if it saves just one illegally caught fish..."