Video
Written Component
In the years following the Revolutionary war, a new government emerged: the Federal government, established on the basis of popular sovereignty (where the authority is sustained by the will of the people.) However, this new system spread mistrust and skepticism throughout the emergent political parties. The Anti-federalist movement in particular was strongly opposed to the idea of a Federal government, fearing that the centralized form of authority would prevent direct representation for the citizens. The party prioritized individual states’ rights and held the interest of the people in very high regard. If the newly-established Federal government found itself unable to placate the opposing party by failing to address the concerns of the citizens, the new country would be fraught with political turmoil for years to come. Fortunately, a solution was proposed: a series of amendments to the Constitution dubbed the Bill of Rights. The new document enumerated civil liberties: rights to which every citizen was entitled. The Bill of Rights states its purpose outright in the preamble: it sought to “prevent misconstruction or abuse of the [Federal government’s] powers.” The Bill of Rights bridged the gap between citizen and government, mollifying the Anti-Fedarilists by advocating for the rights of citizens.
In order to maintain an amicable relationship with their citizens (and, by extension, the opposing Anti-Federalist party,) the Federal government needed to put a long-standing grievance to rest: the quartering of soldiers at the expense of the citizens. The issue can be traced back to pre-Revolutionary war times; In 1768, 4,000 troops were dispatched into Boston (a hotspot for patriotism-induced rioting) in order to enforce Britain’s ever-expanding influence over the colonies. This was on the heels of the Quartering Act of 1765, which dictated that the colonists would need to provide housing for soldiers. As dictated by the Quartering Act, “inns, livery stables, ale houses, victualling houses, and the houses of sellers of wine” were annexed, and new barracks were constructed to accommodate for the influx of British troops. Colonists were outraged by this imposition, their indignation at having to co-exist with the source of their oppression culminating in the Boston Massacre of 1770. Their rage even found its way into the Declaration of Independence, as the “quartering large bodies of armed troops” was added to the long list of grievances against Britain. By encroaching on the colonists’ lives and property, the British government was clearly failing to represent the needs of their citizens. The physical and legal measures taken by the citizens indicate a deep lack of faith in their government which created a rift between themselves and political authority.
After the monarchy was overthrown, The new Federal government not only recognized the citizens’ concerns but instated a preventative measure to ensure that the unjust quartering would never happen again. This took the form of the Third Amendment in the Bill of Rights, which states that “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.” The Third Amendment is the legal manifestation of years of resentment from the citizens. It ensures that they would no longer be burdened by soldiers, instead possessing full ownership over their property. By inscribing the amendment into law and addressing the grievances of the citizens, the Federal government proved itself capable of direct representation and, in doing so, successfully repaired the schism between citizen and government.
The Third Amendment may not seem relevant in the year 2023, as soldiers no longer pose a threat to the domestic security of American citizens. However, many modern historians have recognized the Third Amendment’s importance as the sole direct mention of civilian control over armed forces. Due to this fact, legal scholars have made the concession that the amendment is important to take into account when considering the government’s response to natural disasters, terror attacks, and problems surrounding the militarization of the police. In any case, without the Third Amendment and the Bill of Rights, the Federal government may not have survived to see modern-day America.