Progressing the Constitution - The Ninth Amendment Part II

ArticleVBlog ^ | December 10th 2018 | Rodney Dodsworth

[Jacquerie]

Subtitle: Black-Robe Disease. The only “living Constitution” is one that is followed; a Constitution whose text is ignored is a dead one.¹

Standing over and looking down at the remains of the US Constitution, retired Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy recently admitted in an interview why he provided the fifth vote in Obergefell v. Hodges. “It seemed to me just wrong that under the Constitution, over 100,000 adopted children of gay parents could not have their parents married. I just thought this was wrong.” Well, there you have it. Kennedy admitted an open secret; he let his passions rule his reason and in so doing imposed radical change on an unwilling society. Obergefell was a judicial charade and fraud. It had nothing to do with established Constitutional or judicial standards; it had everything to do with progressing the living and breathing Constitution. Fabricating social justice rights is the essence of progressivism and the Scotus’ habit of pulling rights out of thin air isn’t new.

Like individuals, institutions are also creatures of habit. Scotus began, in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the unconstitutional habit of defining rights. In his concurring opinion, Justice Goldberg cited the 9th Amendment as the basis for invalidating Connecticut’s prohibition on chemical, commercially available birth control.

Ninth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

In a blistering dissent, Justice Black rejected reliance on unwritten fundamental rights as an illegitimate pretext for unrestrained judicial discretion. He found no such “awesome powers over lawmaking.” The Ninth Amendment was “enacted to protect state powers against federal invasion”, and not as “a weapon of federal power to prevent state legislatures from passing laws they consider appropriate to govern local affairs.”

[GoldenPup]

With the current makeup of the SCOTUS, we probably won’t be seeing any more of this type of nonsense...hopefully.

[Uncle Miltie]

[Jacquerie]

THAT’s Kennedy!

[PGalt]

Parts I & II BUMP!

[cuban leaf]

If he thinks it is wrong, he needs to tell the Congress to do something about it. His sole function is to decide on the constitutionality of laws and actions, not do decide if something is right or wrong.

[Jacquerie]

Kennedy simply continued a sixty year Scotus habit.

[Pecos]

Amen! By voting the way he did, he proved he does not actually believe in our country having three equally strong branches of government, but that the judicial branch is actually in control. As I see it, his actions cannot be interpreted any other way.

The really sad thing is that too many other judges feel the same. What none of these ninnies understand is that by chipping away at the other branches' power, all they do is hasten the day when their branch will be swept away as well.

[cuban leaf]

He should be impeached for this admission.

[cuban leaf]

Crroection: He should have been impeached for this admission.

[jeffersondem]

“Kennedy simply continued a sixty year Scotus habit.”

Inevitable after the disaster at Appomattox.

[i_robot73]

>
If he thinks it is wrong, he needs to tell the Congress to do something about it.
>

Yet, again, NOT a power of the Courts

He may offer what steps are needed for it to pass Constitutional muster, but (like gay marriage) cannot decree “It’s (IL)LEGAL. Now, Legislature, FIX it”

[cuban leaf]

Yet, again, NOT a power of the Courts

---

I meant as a private citizen like me. I can tell them what I think is “wrong”, and that’s all he can do, though he might be able to do it via inside track since he has more clout than me. But it’s outside the scope of his actual job description.

[Jacquerie]

<>What none of these ninnies understand is that by chipping away at the other branches’ power, all they do is hasten the day when their branch will be swept away as well.<>

Indeed.

[Jacquerie]

I hope to dip my toe in the waters of nullification in a subsequent post. The Ninth Amendment provides the means to better define the line between positive rights declared by the sovereign people of the states and a Scotus that knows no limits.