THE BILL OF RIGHTS:
THE FIRST TEN AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
AND THE CLOSEST CONNECTION TO YOUR LIFE
“THE THIRD AND FOURTH
AMENDMENTS”
THE THIRD 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.
• You have the right to not have to house and feed soldiers in peace, and if
there is a war, and you are required to do it, then the legislative body of
your representatives must have proscribed the manner in which it is done,
not the executive on his own.
THE THIRD AMENDMENT
• The first case study we will examine regarding the third amendment
presents an interesting interpretation of an amendment that has no real
controversy surrounding it for over 200 years. In fact, up to a few years
ago, I would normally just state what the third amendment was, and move
on without any closer examination. It is only recently that some new
interpretations have arisen that make the third amendment relevant
again. This should demonstrate that the Bill of Rights is a living set of
rights whose interpretations change to meet the times. Not that we
should never refer to the intent of the founding fathers, but in order to
maintain its relevance, when we do refer to them it should be to
understand why they felt the protection was important.
• The case study introduces the concern over modern technology being
used to see in the home of private individuals. It is equated to the third
amendment by comparing this access to having a government employee
living with you.
THE THIRD AMENDMENT
• The second case study refers to a recent event in Nevada where the police
forcibly occupied the home of a citizen who was not accused of any crime.
• The Third Amendment issue that has been brought up by this case is
whether the term “soldier” can be broadened today to include the police,
or any other government official?
To add to the controversy, apparently there are still 18th century British soldiers walking around,
looking for a place to crash, who would like to see the 3rd Amendment repealed.
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
• The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,
and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.
• You or your property cannot be searched without a warrant, unless you
are on public property where by entering you have voluntarily given up
these rights, or officials have reasonable cause to suspect you of a crime.
• In order to get a warrant, the officials have to go before a judge and
demonstrate with strong evidence that there is a high probability that you
are committing a crime.
• Every warrant must specifically state where the officials can look, and
what exactly they are looking for. If they look somewhere not described
on the warrant, or find something not detailed as being sought on the
warrant, it cannot be used against you.
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
• So I am flipping around a few weeks ago, and I come across this show
“Police Women of Cincinnati” and I cannot believe what I see
• Let’s see if you can determine if the police professionals in Cincinnati
demonstrate a knowledge of the Constitution that I think should be part
of their necessary basic training, and if it is not apparent that it is, does it
present a worrisome picture of the nature of our government’s concern
over protecting our rights?
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
• This next case study is probably one of the biggest fourth amendment
controversies to occur in the United States in recent memory.
• Does the National Security Agency’s recording of all cell phone calls in
order to mine them for statements that may indicate terrorist or criminal
activity violate the fourth amendment?
• If it does, does protection and security from terrorist threats override the
rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment?
• Should we trade some of our freedom for increased security, or, is it as
Benjamin Franklin stated, “Those who desire to trade freedom for security
deserve neither?”