Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: freeeee
The reason the 9th and 10th have been ignored is because they are so vague as to be useless in legal terms. They were a sop to the anti-federalists and no one expected that they would have any value other than to mollify opposition to the constitution.

The most conservative members of the Court have been the most active in limiting and circuscribing the reach of the 4th amendment.
362 posted on 02/10/2004 1:22:06 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies ]


To: justshutupandtakeit
The reason the 9th and 10th have been ignored is because they are so vague as to be useless in legal terms.

Now this is hilarious.

Amendment X: 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.

That's so self evident, even a highschool dropout, even the most obtuse mental slouch can't escape it's crystal clear meaning:

All non-enumerated rights are prohibited to the fed.

Anyone who cannot fathom such a simple and essential element of the design of the republic has no business holding any office higher than dog catcher.

The real reason why the 10th is ignored is painfully obvious: It sharply limits the powers of the fed, and the fed doesn't respect any limits. The 10th is the lynchpin that holds together the design of the republic. Without it, the entire design and scope of government is fundamentally altered. Ron Paul introduced a bill requiring all bills to state exactly where in the Constitution the fed derives the power to pursue the law. In a rare moment of candor, John Glenn said that would preclude 90% of what they do.

Do you honestly think the fed would give up the massive apparatus, the immense budget, the far reaching control of one of the largest governments in the history of Earth, just because their founding charter said they should? Hell no! They'll just do what they want and ignore it, and explain it away in some tortured legalese. Vagueness has nothing to do with it.

The most conservative members of the Court have been the most active in limiting and circuscribing the reach of the 4th amendment.

Yet another reason I'm a Libertarian.

377 posted on 02/10/2004 1:47:41 PM PST by freeeee ("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson