B.2(k). Right to Domestic Sovereignty

No Person shall be compelled to provide lodging, sustenance, or other domestic resources to any officer, agent, or member of the Government. Voluntary hospitality remains a protected expression of personal choice and may not be presumed, imposed, or coerced.

The British Parliament passed the Quartering Act of 1765. It was designed as a cost-sharing or cost-shifting measure to help provide for the upkeep of British soldiers in the colonies following the French and Indian War. It required colonial assemblies to provide housing in barracks, inns, livery stables, and ale houses. If these spaces didn’t offer enough space, soldiers were to be housed in private homes and buildings. Colonists had to provide bedding, cooking utensils, firewood, candles, salt, vinegar, and beer or cider. This was a significant burden on the populace. It was unpopular and led to widespread resentment.

In an unrelated matter, colonists in Boston staged the protest we know as the Boston Tea Party in December of 1773. The British response was a series of laws known in history as the Intolerable Acts. One of them, the Quartering Act of 1774, expanded on the first Quartering Act’s scope and power. Its political and punitive purpose was in retaliation for the Boston Tea Party. It sought to expand military presence in civilian areas and intimidate colonial leaders through increased surveillance and control. It’s vital to remember that redcoats weren’t only warfighters. They were the full agents of the crown – spies, police, riot control, you name it. This act was a naked expression of that full scope of their role. Having redcoats in your home meant constant monitoring of your conversations (“Did I just hear you criticize King George?”), visitors (“Was that John Hancock? Isn’t there a warrant for his arrest?”), reading materials (“I see a pamphlet here from the Sons of Liberty. That’s sedition!”), and so on. It was the ultimate in government surveillance and intimidation.

The Founders were so concerned about this that they listed it as one of the grievances in the Declaration of Independence: “For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us.” [1] They went on to enshrine it in the Bill of Rights. [2]

Since the founding, there has been very little litigation on the Third Amendment. There is one significant ruling in Engblom v. Carey. In that case, National Guard troops were housed in the quarters of striking corrections officers. The Second Circuit ruled that this could be a violation of the Third Amendment if the corrections officers had a sufficient property interest. The case was remanded, but was settled before a final ruling. [3] There have also been claims – usually unsuccessful – to invoke the Third Amendment against police staying in homes during investigations or government using private property for surveillance.

While the modern day doesn’t rely on literal quartering of troops, it is easy to imagine requirements for civilians to allow police, IRS agents, the FBI, or any number of other government agencies to use their resources (internet, electricity, water), or quarter in their homes, especially in emergency circumstances. Just as the colonists needed protection from “surveillance through presence,” so do modern Americans.

It's also important to note that the question of whether the individual States can quarter troops has never been tested. Since the Fourteenth Amendment doesn’t explicitly extend this right to bind the States, they could theoretically ignore the Third Amendment.

The language of this enumerated right does several things. First, in the context of the broader Charter, especially Article I, Section 1.C, the protection is broadened so that it applies at all levels of government. Nor, under that same provision, can it be eliminated or reduced by a state of emergency. Second, it protects from intrusion by “any officer, agent, or member of the Government.” Third, it extends beyond mere lodging and sustenance to “other domestic resources.” That means the government can’t commandeer your driveway, use your water, piggyback on your WiFi, and so on. Finally, it allows for a person to offer any of those things voluntarily but prohibits coercion.

---

[1] The Declaration of Independence (U.S. 1776).

[2] See U.S. Const. amend. III.

[3] Engblom v. Carey, 677 F.2d 957 (2d Cir. 1982).