Is a right to privacy violated by enforcement of public nuisance or zoning laws?

Finally, defendants contend their right to privacy under the California Constitution is violated by enforcement of country ordinances in this case, which would cause them to "be removed from the privacy and solitude of their own property and forced to live with others in a trailer park," at least absent any showing of "compelling public need." Defendants cite no authority, however, that supports the notion that the right to privacy may trump enforcement of public nuisance or zoning laws, and we are aware of none. The lone case cited by defendants in support of their argument, Robbins v. Superior Court, is inapposite, addressing a county policy that conditioned receipt of a public benefit on waiver of the constitutional right to privacy. (See Robbins v. Superior Court (1985) 38 Cal.3d 199, 203, 212-213 [policy regarding general assistance benefits for county residents who are single and employable, giving them the choice of either residing in a county shelter or foregoing benefits, violates right to privacy].) Defendants are not compelled by the injunction issued by the trial court to live anywhere in particular; they

Page 8