Of course I have a problem with those, those fall under the unreasonable search clause of the constitution. A warrant is required to do any of those things.
But if police did have probably cause and/or a warrant to do any of those actions they wouldn't find anything illegal.
The difference is that in this case there was reasonable cause for the police to search the home. And they found a clear violation of the law. At the most the supreme court should have said that the evidence was inadmissible because there was no warrant. They should not have overturned the sodomy law, because they were never granted the constitutional power to do that.