Third Amendment: No quartering of soldiers

The Third Amendment bars the government from forcing people to house soldiers in peacetime, and allows it in wartime only as Congress prescribes by law. It's the least-litigated part of the Bill of Rights: "The Supreme Court has never decided a case directly implicating the Third Amendment and has cited it only in a handful of opinions" Verified1. Its importance today is as evidence that the founders treated the home as specially protected.

The text

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Source: National Archives transcription Verified2

What it says, piece by piece

• "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner": in peacetime, the owner decides. No consent, no soldiers.
• "nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law": in wartime, quartering is possible, but only under rules Congress sets in advance, not at an officer's say-so Verified2.

Our reading: the amendment does two jobs. It protects the home, and it keeps the military under civilian law.

History

The complaint is older than the United States. In England, the Petition of Right of 1628 objected that "the inhabitants against their wills have been compelled to receive them into their houses," meaning soldiers and sailors Verified1.

British troops were housed in the colonies under the Quartering Acts, and the Declaration of Independence lists among the King's abuses "For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us" Verified3. Parliament's Quartering Act of 1765 "forbade quartering in private homes but required the colonies to bear the costs of barracks and supplies for British soldiers" or house them in inns and similar places, and it "contributed to growing tensions between the colonists and British Forces" Verified1. The amendment makes sure the new federal government couldn't do the same.

How courts read it

Almost no cases apply it. The Supreme Court's most important use of it is in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which said the amendment's "prohibition against the quartering of soldiers 'in any house' in time of peace without the consent of the owner is another facet of that privacy" protected by the Bill of Rights (Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)) Verified4.

Other Supreme Court mentions are brief. In Katz v. United States (1967), a Fourth Amendment case, the Court noted the Third Amendment as "another aspect of privacy from governmental intrusion," and in Laird v. Tatum (1972) it cited the amendment as an example of "a traditional and strong resistance of Americans to any military intrusion into civilian affairs" Verified1.

The only federal appeals case to examine it in depth is Engblom v. Carey (1982). New York had housed National Guard members in state-owned residences of state corrections officers, without their consent. The Second Circuit said "the Third Amendment is incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment for application to the states," but it decided the case on other grounds Verified1. Our reading: that ruling binds federal courts in the Second Circuit, not courts in California.

How it reaches Williams

It's not clear that it does. The Supreme Court hasn't incorporated it against the states. It's directed at soldiers, so a city police department or code enforcement officer isn't covered by it. Entry into homes by city officials is governed by the Fourth Amendment.

California's version

California's Declaration of Rights has its own rule: "The military is subordinate to civil power. A standing army may not be maintained in peacetime. Soldiers may not be quartered in any house in wartime except as prescribed by law, or in peacetime without the owner’s consent" (Art. I, §5) Verified5. Our reading: because it's in the state constitution, it binds California and its cities directly, whatever the federal courts decide about incorporation.

In Williams

Practically nothing. Its lasting lesson is the one the Fourth Amendment carries forward: the home gets the most protection the Constitution offers. See Williams: entry and inspection.

Common misconceptions

• "It's irrelevant." It's rarely litigated, but Griswold relied on it as part of the case for a right of privacy Verified4.
• "It covers police." Its text covers soldiers.
• "It's been settled that states must follow it." The U.S. Supreme Court hasn't decided that. California's own Art. I, §5 does bind the state Verified5.

Check yourself

Pick an answer for each question. You will see right away if it is right, and why.