You're simply in denial that the supremacy clause exists, as it is written;
LOL! I've acknowledged the clause repeatedly and affirmed the federal government is 'supreme' ONLY when it operates within its enumerated duties.
Yet you deny that State constitutions & laws must also operate under our Law of the Land.
The fact that Congress is named in the 1st's establishment clause does not mean that other levels of federal, state or local governments can infringe upon the peoples rights enumerated [or unenumerated] in the rest of the amendments.
The fact that Congress is named in the First amendment means all the Amendments have to do with Congress and not the States.
All of the Constitution, - [amendments are inseparable parts of the Constitution] -- as per Article VI, applies as our supreme "Law of the Land".
Your theory that the BOR's do not apply is also belied by the 10th, wherein powers are "prohibited by it [the US Constitution] to the states".
IE, in a free State, the rights of the people shall not be infringed.
The States operate within a CIVIL jurisdiction and the Constitution is a purely STATUTORY instrument. That's WHY no 'right to life' appears in the federal Constitution, but that right DOES appear in the State Constitutions.
Our right to life, liberty, or property is mention twice in the Constitution, in the 5th & 14th amendments. -- Yet another weird denial of fact.
Do you know why the legislature is listed before the President or the judiciary?
Doesn't one have to be 'listed' first? -- And one last?
Do you know why the federal government has 'powers', but the States have 'rights'?
You claim states have "rights"? -- The 10th makes it clear that States have powers, some of which the Constitution prohibits. --- Like the power to deprive us of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
No comment from you concerning the fact that the laws of the States do, indeed, 'withstand' the supremacy clause.
You're imagining you've established such a 'fact'.
STILL no sources. Still no instances of a homeowner in California prosecuted for shooting a burglar DESPITE no RKBA in that's State's Constitution.
Rant on that CA's gun prohibitions are constitutionally OK.
You contention that the federal government can force California to acknowledge the RKBA is hollow simply because if it COULD, it would have done so by now.
Get real, -- the feds want to outlaw guns just as bad as CA does. Are you blind to the ongoing national anti-gun movement?
On my question as to WHY the States must have their own Constitutions since you believe the federal Constitution is 'supreme' your reply because they 'have to'.
Hype. -- Our discussion is posted; -- anyone can read my more detailed answer.
Still no evidence of any kind to support your assertions. Just "Blah, blah, blah... because I say so." The really ridiculous part is that you don't even know enough about Constitutional structure to tell a declaratory clause from a restrictive clause or realize the modern definition of a Republic is vastly different than the intention of the Founders.
So you [blah blah] claim, without further specifying your points, if any..
Have you even read Montesquieu? He was the second-most quoted source of the Founders, you know-
Of the Simplicity of Criminal Laws in different Governments
In republican governments, men are all equal; equal they are also in despotic governments:
in the former, because they are everything; in the latter, because they are nothing.
THE SPIRIT OF LAWS Book VI By Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu -----
You have this really bizarre habit of quoting rather esoteric passages, imagining that they buttress your poorly made observations. -- Dream on.
So... Sorry I referred to you as 'junior'. Your lack of evidence and rational debate proves you're obviously undeserving of such a lofty position. Good day.
Whatever.
Good grief. Read this:
Article 6, Clause 2 This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Now... sentence by sentence.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof
The powers granted to Congress are listed in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Nowhere is the federal government given the power to supersede the inherent rights of the States in anything OTHER than those powers listed.
---
under the Authority of the United States
Again, this authority is laid out in the Constitution. As long as the federal government stays within the confines of its enumerated duties which are listed in Section 8, it remains Constitutional.
---
any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
I've showed you this...repeatedly.
Not my fault you choose not to use your capacity for reasoning.
I've also showed you George Tucker who, in 1803, wrote A View of the Constitution, a compendium for the new Constitution, explaining for the People how the newly crated Constitution operated in conjunction with the common law of the American colonists and explaining the Constitutional operation in more detail.
From post #11
That, as this control cannot possibly extend beyond those objects to which the federal government is competent, under the constitution, and under the declaration contained in the twelfth article, so neither ought the laws, or even the constitution of any state to impede the operation of the federal government in any case within the limits of it's constitutional powers. That a law limited to such objects as may be authorised by the constitution, would, under the true construction of this clause, be the supreme law of the land; but a law not limited to those objects, or not made pursuant to the constitution, would not be the supreme law of the land, but an act of usurpation, and consequently void.
-----
Your theory that the BOR's do not apply is also belied by the 10th, wherein powers are "prohibited by it [the US Constitution] to the states".
LOL! Nice of you to breeze by the first part:
Amendment X - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The federal government must stay within its sphere of operation and the State governments must stay within theirs.
i.e. A power exercised that was never delegated is an Unconstitutional power.
-----
Rant on that CA's gun prohibitions are constitutionally OK.
I never said they were. You make the assertion that they California MUST have a RKBA amendment, but they do not. Nor does the federal government seem to be in any hurry to force one on them.
Yet this supposed lack isn't keeping anyone from defending themselves with one, is it?
So what would having it written down change...and why aren't the people of California standing on the doorstep of the legislature to change it?
-----
Get real, -- the feds want to outlaw guns just as bad as CA does.
Sorry, not a power possessed by government at any level.
-----
Hype. -- Our discussion is posted; -- anyone can read my more detailed answer.
Yep..as they say 'The Devil's in the details'
-----
You have this really bizarre habit of quoting rather esoteric passages, imagining that they buttress your poorly made observations. -- Dream on.
(sigh)
Article IV. - The States
Section 4 - Republican government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Hard to insist on a Republican form of government when when you don't even know what one is.
If you want to find out what the Founders meant you have to read what they read and then what they wrote.
-----
Believe what you like.
Until you actually understand what the words in the Constitution mean, and not just what you've been told they say, your rights will continue to slip away.
And you'll have no one to blame but yourself.