We support the ENTIRE Bill of Rights. Turning a blind eye to one part or another for “security” (or any other reason), puts it all in danger. Are you with us?Details
Trying to solve these questions by judicial reasoning rather than historical inquiry converts them from questions about what the framers wrote to questions about what the judge thinks is best.Details
The Amendment can therefore claim no warrant to democratic legitimacy through original popular sovereignty. It was added to the Constitution despite its open failure to obtain the support of the necessary supermajority of the American people.Details
A Review of Timothy Sandefur’s The Conscience of the ConstitutionDetails
As Thomas Jefferson made clear when he wrote the Kentucky Resolutions in 1798, Nullification is not something that’s permitted to the people of the states by any document – it’s their natural right to resist oppressive power. From this, one could easily posit that this right is one that the federal government is barred from infringing under the 9th Amendment.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
More on the 9th in a future power. Here’s Jefferson:
“that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them”
Recently a Federal Judge, Shira Scheindlin, declared the New York City Police departments “Stop and Frisk” procedure Un-Constitutional and called for a federal monitor to watch over the police department to ensure Police Officers are in compliance with the constitution.
This happened without a peep of protest from any New York State elected official, Judge or lawyer.
You would think that Governor Cuomo would be at the fore of the angry protest against Federal intrusion into what is clearly a State Police power. Where does Justice Scheindlin believe her authority to rule on this matter come from? Not the United States Constitution.
The “Stop and Frisk” procedure is clearly un-Constitutional, however, it is the New York State Constitution that matters.Details
I hear you’re a little miffed at Obama’s National Security Agency collecting phone records of millions of innocent American Verizon customers. I read some comments on the “bombshell” over at Townhall.com. Guy Benson seems displeased.
I hear ya!
I’m more than a little perturbed myself. I was always under the impression that the Fourth Amendment limited the federal government’s power to snoop around in innocent people’s private affairs without a warrant.
But I have to admit, I’m a little confused about your indignation. After all, you made it all possible!
Remember the Patriot Act?
Yup. It was your guy, George W. Bush, who insisted the feds needed these broad, sweeping powers to “protect us from the terrorists.” When civil libertarians protested and invoked the Constitution, you ridiculed them and swore it was “only for the terrorists.” You insisted these powers were absolutely necessary to “keep us safe.” I guess you never stopped to think “your guy” wouldn’t remain in power forever.
Nice bed you made.
The incorporation doctrine makes the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution applicable the states.
It wasn’t until 1925, some 57 years after ratification of the 14th, that the Supreme Court mystically found that the amendment bound the states to the Bill of Rights. Since then, America has increasingly become a nation governed by judiciary.
Why is incorporation bad? Can’t the Federal government do things so much better than the states? Vice President Biden believes so. When he was a Senator, he claimed: “…the reason the federal government got into 90 percent of the business it got into is that the state[s]…did not do the job.”
I disagree and say that it is strictly a power grab by the federal government via the courts.
I’m not going to delve into the Constitutionality of incorporation (more on that HERE), but instead focus on how individual liberty is lost when ultimate control is in Washington.
We perhaps see this most clearly in the issue of freedom of religion. The First Amendment clearly says “Congress shall make no law …” Congress obviously does not encompass the states. By allowing this amendment to apply to them, the federal government morphs into a one size fits all policy-maker destroying religious prerogative in the states.Details