A Possible Constitutional Amendment?

Me | June 27, 2003 | Me

[E Rocc]

1. The rights, responibilities, protections, and privileges of citizens of these United States who have attained the age of eighteen years shall not be abridged by any juristiction within its boundaries on the basis of age.

2. The rights, reponsibilities, protections, and privileges of those persons who have not attained the age of eighteen years may be limited or extended by such juristictions. However, the authority and responsibility of their parents may not be limited or usurped by any such juristiction except under the due process of law or if both parents are themselves under the age of eighteen years.

[E Rocc]

Reading some of the Lawrence v. Texas threads, one would think the SCOTUS had authorized what the NAMBLA types call "intergenerational intimacy". Of course they haven't, and never will. But the above Amendment could ease the minds of some and clear up a couple other issues. Between the various causes benefitting, it might get through.

I put this over here because the rules regarding vanities seem to be looser.

-Eric

[GovernmentShrinker]

We've been needing this for a long time, primarily to regain control of the public schools, where various court rulings have found that unruly adolescents have virtually unlimited 1st and 4th Amendment rights (but mysteriously no 2nd Amendment rights).

[Lawgvr1955]

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments should have been sufficient to cover the ills you are seeking to solve. However, the despotic federal government and its courts have eliminated those amendments from the Constitution.

Nothing in a written Constitution is safe when a court finds rights in the "penumbra" of the Bill of Rights. I would hazard a guess your proposed amendment would suffer the same fate.

[E Rocc]

You are aware that your amendment would strip the authority of each state to emancepate minors, right?

The word "may" was used intentionally to allow such emancipation.

-Eric

[E Rocc]

We've been needing this for a long time, primarily to regain control of the public schools, where various court rulings have found that unruly adolescents have virtually unlimited 1st and 4th Amendment rights (but mysteriously no 2nd Amendment rights).

That would be one benefit. The right to home school would also be protected, and government meddling with kids outside the knowledge of their parents stopped.

In retrospect, I'd make a change to tne first section. I'd change "on the basis of age" to "for any reason without due process of law". While the Fourteenth Amendment is generally considered to place the restrictions of the Bill of Rights upon all levels of government, this would cement that protection.

-Eric