Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: All
" Libertarians typically favor an aggressive judiciary that is willing to overturn mistaken precedents and strike down unconstitutional state and federal statutes. The Georgetown law professor Randy Barnett, for instance, has argued that the courts should adopt a “presumption of liberty,” meaning that the government should be required “to justify its restriction on liberty, instead of requiring the citizen to establish that the liberty being exercised is somehow ‘fundamental.’ ” " Is not the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution based on the " presumption of liberty" ?
5 posted on 06/08/2010 5:57:01 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops....and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: stephenjohnbanker
Is not the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution based on the " presumption of liberty" ?

No. They were based on the presumption of local control.

THAT is where there's a big gap--something that I think is more at the core than some supposed judicial activism of libertarian philosophy. The Constitution laid out what the feds were allowed, not restrictions on states.

I used past tense in my first sentence because the original presumptions have been twisted by the Fourteenth Amendment and how it has been twisted.

The sad thing is, the Second Amendment, for example, is left out when the libs interpret the Fourteenth. Prior to the Fourteenth, the residents of a state could vote to restrict firearms in their state...now they shouldn't.

IANAL, though.

6 posted on 06/08/2010 6:20:51 PM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson