“... a well-written Amendment cannot be overturned by the Supreme Court ...”
What part of “shall not be infringed” is so hard to understand? For that matter, the same question could be asked of a number of well-written passages in the Constitution.
“What part of shall not be infringed is so hard to understand? For that matter, the same question could be asked of a number of well-written passages in the Constitution.”
Got it. Really. Now you need to go back and see how the Supreme Court has chipped away at the Tenth Amendment over the last 70 years, so you will understand about infringement. Me? I don’t think it is hard to understand. But SCOTUS does.
A new Tenth Amendment could be written very, very specifically to overthrow SCOTUS decisions over the last 70 years, and reinvigorate the rights of the States. If specific, the Amendment would be incapable of being modified by SCOTUS, the way it was in the 1940s with the Interstate Commerce ruling about wheat — from there it has been all downhill.
“What part of shall not be infringed is so hard to understand? For that matter, the same question could be asked of a number of well-written passages in the Constitution.”
Got it. Really. Now you need to go back and see how the Supreme Court has chipped away at the Tenth Amendment over the last 70 years, so you will understand about infringement. Me? I don’t think it is hard to understand. But SCOTUS does.
A new Tenth Amendment could be written very, very specifically to overthrow SCOTUS decisions over the last 70 years, and reinvigorate the rights of the States. If specific, the Amendment would be incapable of being modified by SCOTUS, the way it was in the 1940s with the Interstate Commerce ruling about wheat — from there it has been all downhill.