The 6th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled last week that Michigan officers were justified in shooting and killing two dogs during a search warrant entry.

The decision, which only applies in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, stems from a 2013 incident in Battle Creek, Michigan, where, according to court documents, police shot and killed a dog while executing a search warrant on a home looking for drugs.

Mark and Cheryl Brown filed a petition with the court to hold the officers and the city responsible for the deaths of their dogs. They said that the officers “unlawfully seized their property in violation of the Fourth Amendment when officers shot and killed two dogs while executing a search warrant,” News 10 reports.

One of the officers testified that he shot the first pit bull after it appeared to move “a few inches” and lunged at him. According to court documents, the dog then retreated to the basement, where the officer shot and killed it.

Court documents say the officer shot the second dog after it went to the basement, turned sideways and barked at the officers.

 “Given the totality of the circumstances and viewed from the perspective of an objectively reasonable officer, the dog poses an imminent threat to the officer’s safety,” Judge Eric Clay wrote in the decision.  “The standard we set out today is that a police officer’s use of deadly force against a dog while executing a search warrant to search a home for illegal drug activity is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment when…the dog poses an imminent threat to the officer’s safety.”

Other federal courts have ruled against officers, resulting in sizable awards to plaintiffs in dog shooting lawsuits.

The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, which applies to much of the Western U.S., has upheld lawsuits against police for Fourth Amendment violations in shootings of dogs. Because the two federal appeals courts have now ruled in opposition to each other, a dog shooting lawsuit appeal may soon make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court for a definitive ruling. The Supreme Court often is more willing to hear a case if two Federal appeals courts rule in opposition.

Police Magazine has extensively covered the dog shooting issue. You can read our 2014 report here.