There’s no place like home.

It’s where the heart is. It’s one’s castle. It’s a family’s refuge, their retreat, where they expect to be safe and warm and dry. And free from prying eyes.

And sniffing dogs.

The home is a place apart. Most people see it that way. Thankfully, so too does a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court, in a 5-4 ruling, said that police do not have the right to bring a drugsniffing dog onto someone’s property in an effort to get a better idea of what’s doing behind closed doors. Not without a warrant. Not in the United States, where the citizens are protected by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution from illegal searches.

Police in south Florida had received a tip about a man who was supposedly growing marijuana in his house. So they showed up, walked right up to his door, onto his porch, even, a drug-sniffing dog in tow.

What was key in the case in question was that it occurred at someone’s home. The high court had previously allowed drug-sniffing dogs to do their thing in searching cars or luggage at airports.

Fine. But not at someone’s home.

The distinction will only become more important as new technologies allow authorities greater reach behind closed doors.

An unusual alignment of justices saw two conservatives and three more liberal members of the Supreme Court in the majority.

It’s always heartening when a case somehow knits together a coalition of justices who don’t generally see eye-to-eye.

Conservatives and liberals don’t agree on much these days but both can see citizens must be protected in their homes from the prying eyes (and noses) of the state.

— The Republican of Springfield (Mass.)