2257 ruled constitutional

at page 70 footnote21

When the Supreme Court developed the administrative search doctrine, it contemplated searches at commercial premises rather than at residences. See Donovan, 452 U.S. at 598-99 (“The greater latitude to conduct warrantless inspections of commercial property reflects the fact that the expectation of privacy that the owner of commercial property enjoys in such property differs significantly from the sanctity accorded an individual’s home, and that this privacy interest may, in certain circumstances, be adequately protected by regulatory schemes authorizing warrantless inspections.”). Accordingly, one could argue that the administrative search doctrine is not applicable to homes at all, and that any inspection at a residence should preceded by a warrant. This Court does not go so far. It finds the administrative search doctrine does apply to Section 2257 inspections at residences, because “producers” of sexually explicit depictions are still part of a “closely regulated” industry even if they choose to store their records at home. But the Court finds the reasonableness of an administrative search should be informed by the type of premises being inspected. When it is a bona fide residence, the place at which privacy expectations are highest, additional protections may be justified. The Court concludes such protections – in the form of advance notice – are required here, given the lack of evidence at trial as to the need for unannounced inspections and the considerable testimony about the burdens that no advance notice places on producers who maintain records at homes