Amendment Number Three

This one has to be a bit tricky for those people in the world, or reading this that have never served in the military.  On one hand you have the fact that through provision of government that a soldier or member of the armed forces cannot be quartered in your house unless mandated by law.  On the other you have to wonder about what law is in place if you are not home, nor are you in the area if troops do occupy your house in a time of war, such as a fire fight.  Yes we can see that you would not want your house to get obliterated by incoming fire but at the same time if you were to stay in the combat zone the security of soldiers would probably be comforting.  Its a toss up, but in the times of peace the government should provide quarters for the standing military which it pays for via taxation, thus the private citizen should have no burden in that respect.

Court case for consideration

Engblom v. Carey, 677 F.2d 957, was a 1982 court case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It is the only significant court decision based on a direct challenge under the Third Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case was initiated by a 1979 strike by New York State correction officers. While the officers were on strike, some of their duties were performed by National Guardsmen who were activated. At Mid-Orange Correctional Facility (and other facilities) striking employees were evicted from employee housing which was then used to house some of the National Guard. Two of the evicted officers at Mid-Orange C.F., Marianne E. Engblom and Charles E. Palmer, subsequently filed suit against the state of New York and its governor, Hugh L. Carey. The decision, rendered on May 3, 1982, established that the National Guardsmen legally qualify as soldiers under the Third Amendment, that the amendment applies to state as well as federal authorities, and that the protection of this amendment extends beyond home owners. The majority stated that the officers' occupancy in the rooms was covered under the legal rules of "tenancy" and was protected under the Third Amendment. There was a minority dissent which stated the officers' occupancy was covered under the lesser protection of employee housing and held that the special circumstances of residency on prison grounds superseded Third Amendment protection. The case was remanded to district court where it was decided in the defendants' favor, due to the principle that as agents of the state, the defendants were covered by a qualified immunity unless they were knowingly acting illegally. In the absence of previous precedents on this issue, the standard of knowing illegality was not met.


Reaction


In the court case above which is the only case to be held over the third amendment I am going to have to put my vote against the ruling.  As the case states the prison guards were on strike, thus in my opinion in forfeit of their privileges which included the housing which was afforded to them on the prison grounds.  Upon entering of the National Guard the guards were evicted, and for due cause as they were not performing the duties which entitled them to their properties on the grounds.  In the capacity of being tenants, yes they were consistent with the performance of their duties, and as such duties were being performed by another party thus tenancy was revoked.  Upon returning to their position tenancy should have been restored which I am sure that it was if they still maintained employment.

A crazy video!!



Reaction

Now although poorly shot this video depicts the truth behind the amendment and what it is supposed to do to protect you the citizen.  Under no circumstances can a soldier by any law commandeer your home for quarter or other means of support.  At the same time that same soldier as shown in the video cannot riffle through your cabinets and refrigerator.  This video shows the basics of what the amendment is for.  Now if this were a combat situation, I am sure the video would be a lot different and the idea of quarter a lot more interpreted than merely looking for a place to stay.  Quarter in my opinion is the support of a person on a day to day basis such as food and shelter.  Now if the soldier needed to move through your home, or position themselves for a time that is not quartering in my opinion, but this would be a war time situation needed to be explored by judiciary powers higher than mine.