Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: PROCON

Wait. Wouldn’t such a federal law be anti-10th Amendment and state sovereignty? Wouldn’t this be an example of the “central planning” that we don’t like? Confused here.


15 posted on 02/27/2017 9:19:01 AM PST by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mtrott

If you compare this bill to national reciprocity for drivers licenses it has precedent. And drivers licenses are privileges, gun rights are Constitutional.


18 posted on 02/27/2017 9:24:01 AM PST by PROCON (Defending the Border isn't a Political Option, it's a Constitutional Obligation ~ Rick Perry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: mtrott

Wait. Wouldn’t such a federal law be anti-10th Amendment and state sovereignty? Wouldn’t this be an example of the “central planning” that we don’t like? Confused here.


No, because of the 14th Amendment, the Federal government has the right and duty to enforce the Bill of Rights in the states.

Under the Interstate Commerce Clause, it should be able to prevent states from restricting private property movement between the states.


25 posted on 02/27/2017 11:32:15 AM PST by marktwain (We wanted to tell our side of the story. We hope by us telling our story...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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