Green Energy
III
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.
IV
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.
XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Fox:
Family allegedly forced from home by police files rare 3rd Amendment suit
A Nevada family is using a rare legal argument in a lawsuit claiming police tried to commandeer their homes for a surveillance operation and then arrested the homeowners for resisting -- invoking the Third Amendment, which bars soldiers from being "quartered" in a residence without permission.
The Mitchell family, in a lawsuit filed July 1, detailed the incident from July 10, 2011. According to the complaint, it all began when the Henderson city police called Anthony Mitchell that morning to say they needed his house to gain “tactical advantage” in a domestic violence investigation in the neighborhood.
The situation turned ugly when Mitchell refused repeated requests to leave and police smashed through the door, the 18-page complaint states.
Mitchell alleges the police, upon entering his home, forced him to the floor at gunpoint, then shot him and his “cowering” dog with a few rounds of pepper-spray pellets. Police then allegedly handcuffed and arrested Mitchell in connection with “obstructing a police officer” before occupying his home.
It didn’t end at Anthony Mitchell’s house in suburban Las Vegas, the complaint continues. That same day, the officers also took over the home of Mitchell’s parents, Linda and Michael Mitchell, who live in the same neighborhood and are named as plaintiffs.
The police department declined Monday to comment on the case when reached by FoxNews.com, leaving the matter to the court should the case go to trial.
However, the more compelling questions appear to focus on whether the Third Amendment strategy can work, considering the courts would have to consider the police officers as soldiers.
The amendment states: "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."
“I’m confident the Mitchells have a good case,” said Frank Cofer, a partner in the firm Cofer, Geller & Durham LLC representing the plaintiffs.
Cofer told FoxNews.com that what struck him about the case was the officers’ use of military-style tactics.
“And after entering the houses, they drank water, ate food, enjoyed the air conditioning,” he said. “That struck me as quartering.”
The suit alleges that, at the parents' house, police lured Michael Mitchell from his home to a nearby “command center” by saying they needed him to get the neighbor involved in the domestic violence case to surrender. When officers began to backpedal, Mitchell eventually attempted to leave, which resulted in him being handcuffed and eventually charged with obstructing an officer.
Police then returned to Mitchells' house where they allegedly yanked wife Linda from the premises after she refused to let them in without a warrant.
She was not arrested, and police have dropped all charges against the family.
However, the Mitchells are still suing for an undisclosed sum, saying their rights as citizens were violated under the Third Amendment -- as well as the Fourth and 14th amendments -- and that the incident resulted in physical injury, malicious destruction of property and “extreme emotional distress.”
Anthony and Michael also had to pay a bond to secure their release, the suit alleges.
John Yoo, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley’s law school, wasn't so sure about the family's argument. He said the Mitchells may have claims under other federal and state laws “but their chances are very, very low on the Third Amendment.”
Yoo, a visiting scholar for the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute and former Justice Department official, told FoxNews.com the most difficult challenge for them is that there were no "soldiers" in their house, before the court gets into the question of whether "quartering" occurred.
“Local police on law enforcement missions are not soldiers,” he said. But “Nevada should compensate the Mitchells’ for the temporary use of their home and for any damages caused in the operation.”
Among those named in the suit are the city of Henderson, the city police department, the police chief, five officers and the North Las Vegas Police Department.
The suit also alleges both police departments “developed and maintained policies and/or customs exhibiting deliberate indifference to the Constitutional rights of United States citizens, which caused the violations of the plaintiffs’ rights.”
- Texas Police Threatened To Arrest Ahmed Mohamed's Father, Internal Memos Show
From Motherboard: Ahmed Mohamed’s father was almost arrested, too. Documents obtained by Motherboard suggest that an Irving, Texas police officer threatened to arrest Mohamed El-Hassan Mohamed, the father of the 14-year-old who was arrested in...
- The Slow But Sure Dissolution Of The Fourth Amendment: Heien V. North Carolina
From Aging Rebel: The Supreme Court of the United States chipped another little piece off the Fourth Amendment Monday.The ruling is not as contemptuous of civil liberties as it has been widely reported to be but it did create a curious division between...
- Shariah Law In America: 'honor Killings' Ok In Dearborn, Michigan
From WND: The lawsuit was brought by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of four Christians whose speech and other civil rights were restricted by official city action at several recent city-sponsored Arab Fest events. The lawsuit on behalf of Acts 17...
- December 15, 1791
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine. THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed...
- Obama Wants To Track Cellphones - Says, Americans Enjoy No "reasonable Expectation Of Privacy" In Their--or At Least Their Cell Phones'--whereabouts
We have no reasonable expectation of privacy? WTF? From CNet: Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous...
Green Energy
III
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.
IV
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.
XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Fox:
Family allegedly forced from home by police files rare 3rd Amendment suit
A Nevada family is using a rare legal argument in a lawsuit claiming police tried to commandeer their homes for a surveillance operation and then arrested the homeowners for resisting -- invoking the Third Amendment, which bars soldiers from being "quartered" in a residence without permission.
The Mitchell family, in a lawsuit filed July 1, detailed the incident from July 10, 2011. According to the complaint, it all began when the Henderson city police called Anthony Mitchell that morning to say they needed his house to gain “tactical advantage” in a domestic violence investigation in the neighborhood.
The situation turned ugly when Mitchell refused repeated requests to leave and police smashed through the door, the 18-page complaint states.
Mitchell alleges the police, upon entering his home, forced him to the floor at gunpoint, then shot him and his “cowering” dog with a few rounds of pepper-spray pellets. Police then allegedly handcuffed and arrested Mitchell in connection with “obstructing a police officer” before occupying his home.
It didn’t end at Anthony Mitchell’s house in suburban Las Vegas, the complaint continues. That same day, the officers also took over the home of Mitchell’s parents, Linda and Michael Mitchell, who live in the same neighborhood and are named as plaintiffs.
The police department declined Monday to comment on the case when reached by FoxNews.com, leaving the matter to the court should the case go to trial.
However, the more compelling questions appear to focus on whether the Third Amendment strategy can work, considering the courts would have to consider the police officers as soldiers.
The amendment states: "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."
“I’m confident the Mitchells have a good case,” said Frank Cofer, a partner in the firm Cofer, Geller & Durham LLC representing the plaintiffs.
Cofer told FoxNews.com that what struck him about the case was the officers’ use of military-style tactics.
“And after entering the houses, they drank water, ate food, enjoyed the air conditioning,” he said. “That struck me as quartering.”
The suit alleges that, at the parents' house, police lured Michael Mitchell from his home to a nearby “command center” by saying they needed him to get the neighbor involved in the domestic violence case to surrender. When officers began to backpedal, Mitchell eventually attempted to leave, which resulted in him being handcuffed and eventually charged with obstructing an officer.
Police then returned to Mitchells' house where they allegedly yanked wife Linda from the premises after she refused to let them in without a warrant.
She was not arrested, and police have dropped all charges against the family.
However, the Mitchells are still suing for an undisclosed sum, saying their rights as citizens were violated under the Third Amendment -- as well as the Fourth and 14th amendments -- and that the incident resulted in physical injury, malicious destruction of property and “extreme emotional distress.”
Anthony and Michael also had to pay a bond to secure their release, the suit alleges.
John Yoo, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley’s law school, wasn't so sure about the family's argument. He said the Mitchells may have claims under other federal and state laws “but their chances are very, very low on the Third Amendment.”
Yoo, a visiting scholar for the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute and former Justice Department official, told FoxNews.com the most difficult challenge for them is that there were no "soldiers" in their house, before the court gets into the question of whether "quartering" occurred.
“Local police on law enforcement missions are not soldiers,” he said. But “Nevada should compensate the Mitchells’ for the temporary use of their home and for any damages caused in the operation.”
Among those named in the suit are the city of Henderson, the city police department, the police chief, five officers and the North Las Vegas Police Department.
The suit also alleges both police departments “developed and maintained policies and/or customs exhibiting deliberate indifference to the Constitutional rights of United States citizens, which caused the violations of the plaintiffs’ rights.”
- Texas Police Threatened To Arrest Ahmed Mohamed's Father, Internal Memos Show
From Motherboard: Ahmed Mohamed’s father was almost arrested, too. Documents obtained by Motherboard suggest that an Irving, Texas police officer threatened to arrest Mohamed El-Hassan Mohamed, the father of the 14-year-old who was arrested in...
- The Slow But Sure Dissolution Of The Fourth Amendment: Heien V. North Carolina
From Aging Rebel: The Supreme Court of the United States chipped another little piece off the Fourth Amendment Monday.The ruling is not as contemptuous of civil liberties as it has been widely reported to be but it did create a curious division between...
- Shariah Law In America: 'honor Killings' Ok In Dearborn, Michigan
From WND: The lawsuit was brought by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of four Christians whose speech and other civil rights were restricted by official city action at several recent city-sponsored Arab Fest events. The lawsuit on behalf of Acts 17...
- December 15, 1791
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine. THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed...
- Obama Wants To Track Cellphones - Says, Americans Enjoy No "reasonable Expectation Of Privacy" In Their--or At Least Their Cell Phones'--whereabouts
We have no reasonable expectation of privacy? WTF? From CNet: Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous...