U.S. Constitution: Ninth Amendment

FindLaw ^ | Unknown | Unknown

[Jacquerie]

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

Aside from contending that a bill of rights was unnecessary, the Federalists responded to those opposing ratification of the Constitution because of the lack of a declaration of fundamental rights by arguing that inasmuch as it would be impossible to list all rights it would be dangerous to list some because there would be those who would seize on the absence of the omitted rights to assert that government was unrestrained as to those.

[Jacquerie]

As opposed to the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, the practical use or implications of the Ninth are little used, little researched and little understood.

Still, it is hard to get around the fact that all of our God given rights cannot be enumerated.

The Ninth is certainly the logical follow-on to "endowed by our Creator with certain Unalienable Rights, among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" in our Declaration of Independence.

[Jacquerie]

Patriot ping!

[Jeff Head]

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government." Patrick Henry

AMERICA NEEDS EACH OF US TO RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION

[KTM rider]

Moot article in light of the fact that the SCOTUS embodies the very definition of exegesis

to wit

1. Rowe v Wade as justification for homicide of the unwanted human souls, yet the killing of a wanted fetus in the womb by an assailant is considered murder.

2. using the interstate commerce clause to justify federal infringement into every element of society, specific example; the recent move by congress to impose fedaral control of the entire healthcare industry and force a mandatory tax to implement it.

This is like arguing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, the supreme court does whatever it wants anyway, even if it defies the laws of logic and science, and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks

[dirtboy]

The last time SCOTUS cited the 9th was Griswold, which in turn was a precedent for Roe.

The 9th was meant to be a constraint on federal power. When it is instead used by the courts as a means to create a new federal right, it can become a means of federal usupration of state powers.

[Telepathic Intruder]

Rights can only be taken away by government; not given. The right to own your own property and build whatever the hell you want on it regardless of how it impacts global warming or the life cycle of an endangered species of fungus seems to be the main reason it’s ignored.

[Jacquerie]

The Scotus gets away with what it has these past 70 years because we the people, through our representatives have allowed it to.

There is a long train of philosophers from Cicero, to St. Thomas Aquinas, Blackstone, Locke and others who escape me at the moment that argued the existence of law above government. Governments get into trouble when they deny the people their Natural Rights. I think we are witnessing in our country a great awakening, a grass roots resistance to an out of control government and a rekindling of patriotism.

That our Constitution is much abused does not detract from what it is, the best ever governing document in history.

[Phlyer]

The Ninth is certainly the logical follow-on to "endowed by our Creator with certain Unalienable Rights, among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" in our Declaration of Independence.

I agree, but this discussion, and most of those on the 14th Amendment, ignore the importance of the 10th Amendment. There are indeed unenumerated rights, but among the enumerated rights is the right not to have the federal government control all aspects of our lives. So if there is a right to privacy (and I believe there is) that does not mean we give up the right (10th Amendment) not to have the federal government take it upon itself to control it.

The problem with Roe v. Wade is not just that it's immoral (and therefore 'bad') but that it directly violates the 10th Amendment to have the federal government exercise authority in that area. It would have been just as unConstitutional for the federal government to have prohibited abortion in all the states (no matter how 'good' that would be for our society as a whole).

Each of the Bill of Rights but one has a limitation on the ability of the federal government, not only in laws that it can make restricting the right, but also in authority to enforce the right against acts by others (since 'modified' by the 14th Amendment).

For example, the 1st Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law . . " As written, it was not a restriction on anyone but Congress, and by implication (since Congress has the sole authority to make law) on the federal government. But states could, in fact, restrict free exercise of religion until the 14th Amendment came along. Similarly, the 4th Amendment says that the people shall be safe in their persons and property from unreasonable search and seizure, and "no warrant shall be issued unless . ." All of the Amendments have similar limitations either on the power of the federal government directly or on its ability to enforce the underlying right.

The sole exception is the 2nd Amendment, which bluntly says, the right "shall not be infringed." That actually provides the federal government the authority to enforce the right even against state and local action (while, of course, restricting the federal government in its own actions against that right).

Bottom line, we have the "right", which is a "privilege and immunity" not to have the federal government take action on each and every right we have. So while I agree that the 9th Amendment provides the room for additional rights than those enumerated, it does not in itself negate an enumerated right - including the enumerated right in the 10th Amendment.

[Huck]

using the interstate commerce clause to justify federal infringement into every element of society

Yup. Including SCALIA.

[iamweasle]

State representatives will be meeting to discuss this very issue in Omaha next January.

[Jacquerie]

Roe v. Wade is a rejection of our founding principles, the right to life itself.

The Framers and the states that submitted amendments knew that our rights were not the leftovers of powers granted to the federal government, so I don't see conflict between the 9th and 10th. As for the 14th, I have spent was too much time trying to figure out what Scotus has done to it. From what little I understand, some of the Constitution applies to the states, and some does not. An example is the 2nd, which after 160 years or since ratification of the 14th, Scotus doesn't know what we know, that self protection via arms is a Natural Right.

[AmericanHunter]

“That our Constitution is much abused does not detract from what it is, the best ever governing document in history.”

That is true but, it does render the constitution meaningless when it is routinely ignored as it is today.

[Jacquerie]

We are experiencing the perfect storm against our Constitution and rights.

The possibility was recognized by the Framers. Hamilton wrote that tyranny is assured when the legislative and judicial functions combine. They also assumed the states would defend their just powers and the people would defend their rights. That it has not turned out that way does not detract from their system of divided powers and rights retained.

“When the spirit of liberty has fled, and truth and justice are disregarded, private rights can easily be sacrificed under the law.” - Kent’s Commentaries.

[MajorThomas]

Methinks that our US constitution is probably the best ever scribed set of laws that a society can live by, recently it seems that the way our "living interpreters" who chose to adopt a very liberal interpretation of these words, make me think that the very paper our words have been written on, is good only to line the bottom of our bird cage with. When a society and its best legal minds not only seeks but succeeds in "re-painting" its meaning to their own vices, prejudices, and excuses, I begin to wonder wether TJ's advice should be heeded. I then think, not if, or how, but, when.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

[AmericanHunter]

“They also assumed the states would defend their just powers and the people would defend their rights. That it has not turned out that way does not detract from their system of divided powers and rights retained.”

I see some glimmers of hope lately that the states and the people will defend their rights. Until that happens, however, it does “detract from their system of divided powers and rights retained” because it is no longer practiced. Putting the federal “genie” back into the constitutional bottle is a daunting task that, I hope, the American people are up to.

[MajorThomas]

quod erat demonstrandum

[SunkenCiv]

1. the 1st Amendment
2. the 2nd Amendment
3. the 3rd Amendment
4. the 4th Amendment
5. the 5th Amendment
6. the 6th Amendment
7. the 7th Amendment
8. the 8th Amendment
9. the 9th Amendment
10. the 10th Amendment
11. the 11th Amendment
12. the 12th Amendment
13. the 13th Amendment
14. the 14th Amendment
15. the 15th Amendment
16. the 16th Amendment
17. the 17th Amendment
18. the 18th Amendment
19. the 19th Amendment
20. the 20th Amendment
21. the 21st Amendment
22. the 22nd Amendment
23. the 23rd Amendment
24. the 24th Amendment
25. the 25th Amendment
26. the 26th Amendment
27. the 27th Amendment

[Jacquerie]

And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?

I just imagined 535 lamp posts in DC. Each had a rope.

[editor-surveyor]

Thanks for the ping!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!