# Can I do a citizen's arrest on a trespasser? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 20, 2009, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073 "2009-05-20T15:13:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/41 "2009-05-20T20:12:12Z")
From the staff report linked upthread, which I wrote: > [@](#): > > What’s missing here? None of the cases say you have to let solicitors onto your property, or permit them to stay. That’s because you don’t. “Traditionally the American law punishes persons who enter onto the property of another after having been warned by the owner to keep off,” said the Court in the Jehovah’s witness case above. In Central Hardware v. NLRB the Court drew a distinction between private property that serves some of the functions of public space (e.g., the common areas in a shopping mall) and private property that’s public only in the sense that people aren’t physically barred from entering it. As the ruling explained: > > ``` > Before an owner of private property can be subjected to the commands of the First and Fourteenth Amendments the privately owned property must assume to some significant degree the functional attributes of public property devoted to public use. > > ``` > > I’m guessing that doesn’t sound like your house. > > In many jurisdictions, failure to leave private property after the owner has made it clear the visit is unwelcome is criminal trespass. Some make it a crime to knock on the door of a home that displays a sign that says “No Solicitors” or something similar. If a solicitor were especially pesky, you could sue for damages and an injunction, although then the issue would be drifting away from straight-up trespassing and toward harassment. But even if you’ve suffered no real harm from the trespass, you can get nominal damages. The Idaho Supreme Court recently explained that such damages constitute “a ‘trifling sum’ awarded to ‘demonstrate, symbolically, that the plaintiff’s person or property has been violated.’” > > Many jurisdictions also recognize that a property owner has the right to use reasonable force to remove trespassers who refuse to leave after being asked. Notice I said reasonable force – brandishing a weapon is generally frowned on in cases like this, and drawing blood is out of the question. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/42 "2009-05-20T20:12:33Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Brilliant argument! You’ve convinced me now. > > Umm, wait. No you didn’t. The granting by the government to a private individual of authority that is ordinarily only given to the police (such as arrest) is a government action. The person making the arrest is acting on behalf of the state. Except that if i tresspass onto your land (after being duly warned) and scream at you regarding my political beliefs, you are in violation of a criminal statute. possessory rights of private landowners (this is key, this private part) is not trumped by the first amendment (except in california, for different reasons) assume a cop is right there. you will get arrested. your case will not be thrown out on appeals. if, however, i was a government and i ran, let’s say, a park, and you went through all the ministerial acts of securing permits to speak at a certain date and time in said park, the police can’t suddenly arrest you for “tresspassing” if i start talking about pot or war. ---
**Author:** ![mutantmoose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a87d85/32.png) [@mutantmoose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mutantmoose)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/43 "2009-05-20T20:16:05Z")
People have a bare licence to enter your property and knock on the door. The licence is easily revocable ie you revoke the licence as soon as you ask them to leave. At that point they become trespassers if they don’t leave immediately. (I’m in UK but I would think this will apply to US law as well) ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/44 "2009-05-20T20:20:45Z")
> [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > Except that if i tresspass onto your land (after being duly warned) and scream at you regarding my political beliefs, you are in violation of a criminal statute. possessory rights of private landowners (this is key, this private part) is not trumped by the first amendment (except in california, for different reasons) > > assume a cop is right there. you will get arrested. your case will not be thrown out on appeals. > > if, however, i was a government and i ran, let’s say, a park, and you went through all the ministerial acts of securing permits to speak at a certain date and time in said park, the police can’t suddenly arrest you for “tresspassing” if i start talking about pot or war. Whups. the pronouns were all messed up on that one. you get the point though ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/45 "2009-05-20T20:25:52Z")
> [@mutantmoose](#): > > People have a bare licence to enter your property and knock on the door. The licence is easily revocable ie you revoke the licence as soon as you ask them to leave. At that point they become trespassers if they don’t leave immediately. Precisely. To quote myself again: > [@](#): > > the jerk doesn’t have a right to come onto your property if you tell him not to, but the First Amendment often prevents the government from forbidding such jerks to try and communicate with you unless you explicitly say no. As the Supreme Court noted in \*Martin v. City of Struthers, > \* > > > [@](#): > > > > For centuries it has been a common practice in this and other countries for persons not specifically invited to go from home to home and knock on doors or ring doorbells to communicate ideas to the occupants or to invite them to political, religious, or other kinds of public meetings. Whether such visiting shall be permitted has in general been deemed to depend upon the will of the individual master of each household, and not upon the determination of the community. > > So the key is that you’ve got to make it clear they’re not welcome. Because, as the Court has acknowledged elsewhere, typically “the knocker on the front door is treated as an invitation or license to attempt an entry[.]” > > It seems intuitive that the First Amendment would protect one’s right to enter private property in instances like this. For the most part, though, it doesn’t. One of the most powerful rights held by an owner of real property is the right to exclude others. If you don’t want someone on your property, you can keep them out, but again the onus is on you to make such wishes clear. ---
**Author:** ![Dripping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d2c977/32.png) [@Dripping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dripping)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/46 "2009-05-20T20:26:43Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > Some make it a crime to knock on the door of a home that displays a sign that says “No Solicitors” or something similar. Okay, this is the crux of my OP. Let’s assume, just for argument’s sake, that my jurisdiction has this law/ordinance. I have a huge sign nailed to my door that says “no soliciting, violators will be prosecuted”. A vacuum salesman marches right up and knocks on my door (the door with the sign, no possible way the salesman could not have seen it). I desire to have this person charged with a crime. What comes next? ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/47 "2009-05-20T20:28:21Z")
> [@Dripping](#): > > I desire to have this person charged with a crime. What comes next? you get laughed at as the cops continue on their day, chasing speeders and busting potheads. seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/48 "2009-05-20T20:29:11Z")
> [@Dripping](#): > > What comes next? You call the police, who will likely ignore you depending on the size of you jurisdiction. Or, if your jurisdiction’s citizen’s arrest laws allow arrest for the type of crime in those circumstances, you can effect a citizen’s arrest and likely have to defend (probably successfully) a civil lawsuit. ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/49 "2009-05-20T20:29:11Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > Precisely. To quote myself again: > > > [@](#): > > > > So the key is that you’ve got to make it clear they’re not welcome. Because, as the Court has acknowledged elsewhere, typically “the knocker on the front door is treated as an invitation or license to attempt an entry[.]” How can one make his door not an invitation? Just no knocker? I have seen people bang on a gate with a key when they cannot reach the front door. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/50 "2009-05-20T20:31:43Z")
> [@Sapo](#): > > How can one make his door not an invitation? Just no knocker? I have seen people bang on a gate with a key when they cannot reach the front door. No, the presumption is that people impliedly invite people to come up and knock on their doors. You refute this implication by making it abundantly clear that it’s not the case with respect to your property - hanging multiple, obvious “no trespassing” signs and whatnot should do the trick. edit: obviously if they’re standing outside of your property limits banging a key on your gate it’s not at all clear that you don’t want to entertain requests to enter your property. while the touching of their gate is technically a trespass, you haven’t made it clear that they don’t have a license to do so (a license to get your attention). at least that’s how i’d read it. ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/51 "2009-05-20T20:32:47Z")
> [@Dripping](#): > > Okay, this is the crux of my OP. Let’s assume, just for argument’s sake, that my jurisdiction has this law/ordinance. I have a huge sign nailed to my door that says “no soliciting, violators will be prosecuted”. A vacuum salesman marches right up and knocks on my door (the door with the sign, no possible way the salesman could not have seen it). > > I desire to have this person charged with a crime. What comes next? What is your ultimate intention when prosecuting this case? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/52 "2009-05-20T20:36:20Z")
> [@Sapo](#): > > How can one make his door not an invitation? Just no knocker? I have seen people bang on a gate with a key when they cannot reach the front door. A “no solicitors” sign or something similar is probably sufficient to limit the license. Not all jurisdictions make a bare trespass like that criminal though. So there’s a separate issue about whether the police would be helpful or whether you could perform a citizen’s arrest. In most jurisdictions, you could use reasonable force to expel the trespasser, sprinklers might be ok, for example. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/53 "2009-05-20T20:38:59Z")
> [@](#): > > One of the most powerful rights held by an owner of real property is the right to exclude others. If you don’t want someone on your property, you can keep them out, but again the onus is on you to make such wishes clear. For the most part. In the case I cite above, _State v. Shack_, the property owner wanted to exclude a health worker and a legal aid attorney visiting migrant laborers from his private (_i.e.,_ not open to the public) farm. That plainly isn’t on all fours with the case here; the interest in protecting an otherwise isolated and vulnerable community is not present. Nevertheless, the [bundle of sticks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundle_of_rights) is a little thinner than in the days when deference to real property title was at its apogee. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/54 "2009-05-20T20:45:27Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > _But see_ [Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980).](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins) > > Nevertheless, **Markxxx** ’s analysis _is_ imperfect. But, he’s on to something. The JWs and the SCOTUS have a rich history together. Ok, let’s be a little bit better at responding with citations that THAT. :dubious: _Pruneyard_ says NOTHING about the First Amendment, or even its application to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment. The ability of a person to assert a free speech right at a private shopping center is limited to California, which has a more expansive right to free speech in its constitution. The only issue that touched the federal constitution in that case was an alleged taking under the Fifth Amendment (via the Fourteenth Amendment) by the state, an argument which was summarily dispatched. So, to summarize, the United States Constitution does not guarantee a private person the right to go onto private property and speek freely. It doesn’t matter if it is a Jehovah’s Witness, a door-to-door salesman, or a garden-variety loon, you don’t have the right to speak freely on someone else’s property. The sidewalk, yes. The street, yes. His front porch? No. (All the “yes” answers subject of course to reasonable limitations on time and place, etc.) Having said that, the Supreme Court _ **has** _ held (in 1943, with regard to Jehovah’s Witnesses) that a city cannot make door-to-door solicitation illegal. Cases since have waffled on the extent to which a municipality might be able to regulate door-to-door dissemination of political or religious ideas. The rationale, however, was that the individual property owner should be allowed to decide who he does or does not allow on his land. Thus, these cases are not supportive of an assertion that a property owner must allow a door-to-door solicitor, even if that person is engaged in religious efforts. Thus, the analysis by **Markxxx** is not very correct. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/55 "2009-05-20T20:47:42Z")
> [@Dripping](#): > > What comes next? As I pointed out in the staff report, the police are unlikely to dash right out. If you tell them that you’ve got a trespasser and the guy won’t leave, I suspect they’ll probably come out and pick him up. Citizen’s arrest may or may not be a possibility, depending on the jurisdiction. It’s usually got to be for a felony or breach of the peace. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/56 "2009-05-20T20:48:22Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The rights under the First Amendment generally give you the right to approach someone and speak to them. They don’t have to listen to what you have to say, but the government would be skirting the line by prophylactically prohibiting people from even approaching you. This is so not true, it’s quite laughable, actually. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/57 "2009-05-20T20:51:25Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > Nevertheless, the [bundle of sticks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundle_of_rights) is a little thinner than in the days when deference to real property title was at its apogee. Agreed. But cases like the one you cite generally involve: 1. One person with a right to be on the property who wants to meet with someone else whom the property owner wants to prevent from meeting with them; or 2. Areas that are quasi-public. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/58 "2009-05-20T20:56:37Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > Ok, let’s be a little bit better at responding with citations that THAT. :dubious: . . . Pruneyard says NOTHING about the First Amendment Is there a legal version of Gaudere’s Law? In any case, you’re wrong that the case didn’t address the federal First Amendment. The case involves the federal First Amendment rights of the property owner as well as the California rights of the speaker. I quote: > [@](#): > > [T]o distribute pamphlets and request passersby to sign petitions addressed to the President and Members of Congress, does not violate the property owner’s free speech rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments as forcing him to use his property as a forum for the speech of others, in that views expressed by members of the public in passing out pamphlets or seeking signatures for a petition will not likely be identified with those of the owner due to the nature of the shopping center as a business establishment open to the public, there is no danger of governmental discrimination for or against a particular message because the state court’s construction of the state constitutional provisions does not require any specific message to be displayed in the shopping center, the shopping center owner may expressly disavow any connection with the protected activity by posting signs in the area where the activity takes place, and the state court’s construction of the provisions does not compel the property owner to affirm a belief in any governmentally prescribed position or view. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/59 "2009-05-20T21:03:29Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > A “no solicitors” sign or something similar is probably sufficient to limit the license. Not all jurisdictions make a bare trespass like that criminal though. So there’s a separate issue about whether the police would be helpful or whether you could perform a citizen’s arrest. In most jurisdictions, you could use reasonable force to expel the trespasser, sprinklers might be ok, for example. Oh hell no. Not that I dont agree with you in theory and acceptable practice, but… I recall a news story recently where some guy sprayed some other guy to get him to leave. He accidently barely sprayed an innocent third party with water (the horror of horrors). In yet another case of legal justice, he got charged with assault (or something like that) for accidentaly getting someone wet… ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073/60 "2009-05-20T21:04:39Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > Ok, let’s be a little bit better at responding with citations that THAT. :dubious: > > _Pruneyard_ says NOTHING about the First Amendment, or even its application to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment. The ability of a person to assert a free speech right at a private shopping center is limited to California, which has a more expansive right to free speech in its constitution. The only issue that touched the federal constitution in that case was an alleged taking under the Fifth Amendment (via the Fourteenth Amendment) by the state, an argument which was summarily dispatched. > > So, to summarize, the United States Constitution does not guarantee a private person the right to go onto private property and speek freely. It doesn’t matter if it is a Jehovah’s Witness, a door-to-door salesman, or a garden-variety loon, you don’t have the right to speak freely on someone else’s property. The sidewalk, yes. The street, yes. His front porch? No. (All the “yes” answers subject of course to reasonable limitations on time and place, etc.) > > Having said that, the Supreme Court _ **has** _ held (in 1943, with regard to Jehovah’s Witnesses) that a city cannot make door-to-door solicitation illegal. Cases since have waffled on the extent to which a municipality might be able to regulate door-to-door dissemination of political or religious ideas. The rationale, however, was that the individual property owner should be allowed to decide who he does or does not allow on his land. Thus, these cases are not supportive of an assertion that a property owner must allow a door-to-door solicitor, even if that person is engaged in religious efforts. > > Thus, the analysis by **Markxxx** is not very correct. Counselor, look again at the specific claim quoted\* and which I was responding to and see if there is any limitation to First Amendment rights there. 😉 - To wit: Originally Posted by **jtgain** _You have a right to the enjoyment of your property and my rights cannot intrude on that._ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-i-do-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-trespasser/497073.md?page=4)