A dramatic and complex legal battle has unfolded as a pro se plaintiff files a complaint against several federal and state agencies, alleging severe constitutional violations during a multi-agency operation. The lawsuit was filed by Cody Butzer in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio on December 18, 2025, targeting the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Bath Township Police Department, Akron Police Department, and unnamed agents.
The case stems from an intense operation that took place on June 30, 2025. According to Butzer’s complaint, this operation involved numerous federal and state agencies executing a search and seizure without proper limitations or specificity. The plaintiff alleges that these actions were not only excessive but also violated multiple constitutional rights. The operation allegedly included forcible entry into Butzer’s residence and business properties, preventing communication with legal counsel, detaining family members including a disabled child, removal of security cameras, seizure of unspecified items, and compelling DNA samples under duress. Butzer argues that these actions collectively breached the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures as well as Fifth Amendment rights regarding due process.
The plaintiff further contends that his Sixth Amendment rights were infringed upon when he was denied access to legal counsel during critical stages of detention and interrogation. Additionally, he claims that state agencies acted beyond their jurisdiction in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause. The complaint highlights retaliatory motives behind the operation linked to prior interactions with an FBI informant who allegedly attempted to recruit Butzer for questionable operations targeting political figures—a proposal he declined shortly before the raid occurred.
Butzer seeks declaratory judgment from the court affirming that his constitutional rights were violated by the defendants’ actions. He requests injunctive relief to prevent further retaliation or interference with his property and business operations. Furthermore, he demands preservation of all seized property pending full accounting by the defendants along with unsealing relevant documents related to the search affidavit.
Representing himself in this intricate legal matter is Cody Butzer as pro se plaintiff. Presiding over this case is Judge Adams with Magistrate Judge Knabp assisting in proceedings under Case ID 5:25-cv-02742-JRA.
Source: 525cv02742_Butzer_v_Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation_Complaint_Northern_District_Ohio.pdf
