Thank you for that insight donna.
Thinking out loud ...
If I understand the referenced article correctly, please consider the following.
"One of her braiders reportedly did not have a government license to braid hair in her shop and that runs afoul of the Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners policy [??? emphasis added]."
On one hand, the seemingly harsh fine seems to be based on constitutionally unchecked, 10th Amendment (10A)-protected state powers.
On the other hand, just as the corrupt federal Congress unconstitutionally front-ends “federal” regulatory powers with non-elected, regulation-making bureaucrats, many such regulations not only based on stolen state powers, but non-elected bureaucrat regulators wrongly nullifying the voting power of ordinary voters imo, consider this.
If Tennessee cosmetologists and barbers for example, cannot use their voting power to choose their regulators, then such agencies are wrongly nullifying voting power imo.
"In 2012, a Utah woman who braids hair to supplement her family’s income won a federal lawsuit against the state over its licensing process for her craft, arguing state regulations violated her right to earn a living [??? emphasis added].
The states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect earning a living as a right. Corrections, insights welcome.
A federal judge ruled that the state’s requirement that Jestina Clayton get a cosmetology license to braid hair was “unconstitutional and invalid” because regulations are irrelevant to Clayton’s profession [??? emphasis added]."
First, I don’t see where the feds have any jurisdiction in this case. And if such is the case, it can be argued that the federal judge was helping to expand the already unconstitutionally big federal government’s powers.
It can also be argued that the federal judge did not understand health concerns mentioned by donna which the states have the 10A-protected power to address.
Corrections, insights welcome.
“Cosmetology spreads a lot of disease. It’s like having restaurants inspected for public health.”
Inspections can be achieved without demands for a “license” and license fees (separate and additional business taxes) do not necessarily make a place safer.
In most major cities, every restaurant must have a license but seldom have the majority of restaurants had regular inspections. A “license” does not automatically mean either better or safer. YOU the customer are a better judge of that.
Careful the Ron Paul folks will tell you that the state has no authority
You get sick? Sue the owners
I haven’t been to a salon in decades. Once since we’ve been married. Mr. b cuts my hair and I his. He and the dogs share clippers.
Guess what! If you go to a restaurant outside of a big city that has a health inspection office, chances are the health inspector has never been there. Restaurant inspectors don’t set one foot outside of Austin, TX. Even if they get a complaint, they’re not leaving the city limits. Supposedly, there aren’t enough inspectors. Bet there’s even less chance of one inspecting a salon.
Decades ago, a local boy grew up to become a meat inspector so we had him inspecting area slaughter houses but once he retired, that was the end of that.
My son in law is a licensed plumber, they say “The plumber protects the health of the nation”. It’s true.
After completing a five-year apprenticeship and passing the state test, he is required four hours of continuing education each year.
Not all this BS for a hair braider.
I have another relative that is a physician, at his graduation many years ago, they said, in the last century modern plumbing added 15 years to American lives, modern medicine add two years.