The Declaration of Independence is often misunderstood, which I wrote about here. One of the most important, yet overlooked, sections of the document is the list of indictments against King George III. The indictments are further evidence that the Declaration was never meant to be a revolutionary statement. From the Magna Carta to the colonial constitutions, George III was indicted for violating existing laws. Jefferson listed a total of 27 indictments against the King. Throughout February, we’re going to look at one indictment a day, why it was levied, and why it is still relevant.
Indictment #14 reads as follows:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
Why was the indictment levied: Parliament passed the Quartering Act in 1765, which forced the colonists to provide shelter to the crown’s troops. If the colonists did not comply, they could face legal consequences.
Many colonists did refuse quartering, and British soldiers were quartered in the State House instead. Great Britain continued to send troops to seaport towns, and Americans that refused to quarter troops faced more troubles. This escalated until the initial violence of the American War for Independence erupted.
Why is this important today: The Quartering Act directly led to the 3rd Amendment:
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.
Thankfully, this indictment does not have significant modern counterparts. Judicially, the 3rd Amendment is one of the least-cited areas of the Constitution. But, as the definition of military expands, and federal agencies grow disguised as branches of military, this could change.
The 3rd Amendment runs into some complications via the 1982 case of Engblom v. Carey. New York State corrections officers went on strike, and they were evicted from the staff residency they were renting and replaced with National Guard troops that were brought in to run the prison.
The case should not invoke the 3rd Amendment. The National Guard are state-regulated militia and not Federal troops. Remember, the Bill of Rights and amendments within apply to the Federal government, not the states. The states are not corporations of the Federal government and have their own judicial processes and constitutions that the Federal government does not override. All states have provisions in their own constitutions that deal with private property rights and quartering.
This case took the bizarre stance that the 3rd Amendment was incorporated and could apply to a state directly. The courts interpretating amendments is dangerous because interpretations can change with the wind. If similar cases reach the Supreme Court in the future, could a court unconstitutionally rule in favor of a branch of the military? We’re not just talking about troops in the Army. NASA was initially setup as a branch of the Army. Almost anything could fall under the umbrella of “defense spending.” Could your private property rights be violated for anything a court, or an executive, believes is an “existential threat?” Only time will tell.