Does the Bill of Rights apply to non-citizens?

[MODU]

While we imply that these rights are extended to everyone, Constitutionally, they apply to only citizens.  People who are non-citizens living in the US legally technically are not covered under the Constitution.

[MODU]

Based on the usage of the word "person" in the original constitution, I'd venture that they would.

^^ yeah, person doesn't mean citizen, so it does when it says person.

Actually, "people" or "person" is defined in the first sentance of the Constitution.  "We the People of the United States..."  So, in order to be a person of the United States, you need to be a citizen.  Otherwise, the Native Americans would have had the same protections under the Constitution at the time of drafting, which they didn't.

[MODU]

Actually, "people" or "person" is defined in the first sentance of the Constitution.  "We the People of the United States..."  So, in order to be a person of the United States, you need to be a citizen.  Otherwise, the Native Americans would have had the same protections under the Constitution at the time of drafting, which they didn't.

No, with respect, "citizen"/"People" and "person" are not the same. See the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects the privileges and immunities of "citizens," but the due process rights of all "persons."

However, the Fourteen Amendment is not a part of the Bill of Rights, and we need to look at it from that aspect.  At the time the Bill of Rights were written, the authors were looking from the aspect of citizens of the US.  Even slaves were not extended the full rights under the Bill of Rights.

[MODU]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How can you demonstrate that? For example, how would you show that the Third Amendment only protects citizens?

Quartering of soldiers?  That's easy.  How many non-citizen home-owners remained in the US following the signing of the Constitution?  Not many.  Most pro-Brit residents who rebuffed the Union left.  That leaves the pro-Union citizens behind, which as we all know, were primarily WASPs.  And, as you can see in the Amendment, it addresses owner, not resident.  For those who had to rent, they were not granted any protection from the owner who might decide to let troops stay in their home.

[MODU]

Quartering of soldiers?  That's easy.  How many non-citizen home-owners remained in the US following the signing of the Constitution?  Not many.

It does not follow that the Third Amendment only protects citizens, as you suggest. Such a reading of any part of the Bill of Rights (except perhaps parts that refer to "people," like the Second Amendment) ignores the plain meaning.

No, it doesn't.  That's why I asked who were the home owners back then?  Hardly any non-citizens were home owners since the pro-Brit folks primarily migrated back to Europe.