[Political Junkie Too]

The Supreme Court already ruled that agents of the state ARE covered by the 3rd amendment.

From Wikipedia Third Amendment to the United States Constitution :

---

The Third Amendment has been invoked in a few instances as helping establish an implicit right to privacy in the Constitution. Justice William O. Douglas used the amendment along with others in the Bill of Rights as a partial basis for the majority decision in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which cited the Third Amendment as implying a belief that an individual's home should be free from agents of the state.

---

-PJ

[Sherman Logan]

Umm, I think it’s right that using 3A in this way was part of the court discerning emanations of penumbras that find new rights.

Quartering of soldiers is prohibited. That had a quite precise meaning at the time.

This case was not it.

To my mind, you cannot object when the court finds a “new right” in the Constitution that you disagree with, but want the courts to find new rights you approve of.

[Paperpusher]

Are you sure you are not thinking of Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497, 516 -522 (dissenting opinion - See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/381/479.html#sthash.oXszuUAR.dpuf

Note it is a dissenting opinion