I think this is actually a 4th Amendment issue. Even if the police are temporarily seizing your home, it is still different than the military quartering troops. The police will go for the exigent circumstance exception. The victim should challenge the Use of Force based upon the Graham v. Connor standard for use of force to be reasonable and necessary. Use of Force challenges are also based upon 4th Amendment case law, as the SCOTUS considers physical force against you to be a seizure of your physical well being
I agree. I see it as a 4th Amendment issue.
If anything, it is an illegal Fifth Amendment takings. At the least, the family should bill the police department for premium renting of their home.
And they should still pursue Third Amendment quartering, as police are "agent of the state" as cited in the SCOTUS Griswold case I posted above.
-PJ
While acts of a de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy, the acts of a person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist de jure can have no validity whatever in law.
An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.
18 USC § 2384 Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Marbury v. Madison 1803, vol 5, pg 137
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation that, in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that
a law repugnant to the Constitution is void,
and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
I would appeal the verdict and with the "case law" as stated above, I would charge the cops, DA, and Judge with treason