P&I -- no, bork doesn't believe it should be ignored, he is pointing out that the SC at the time thought so, and with good reason, P&I was left utterly undefined. NOBODY knows what it means, nobody has ever found any evidence what was intended. Read Bork's Tempting of America. It is unfortunate, he notes, that words were plainly put there for a reason, but since NOBODY knows what that reason is, it has been "left dead".
My reasoning: Come, come now. Surely YOUR militia reasoning, which I admittedly like, is a bit convoluted. And what's wrong with my reasoning? I am IMMUNE from edu spending on the fed level, if I am to enjoy all my immunities evenly, then I am immune on the state level too. It is PRECISELY the same reasoning as yours -- I am immune to gun laws on the fed level, therefore, I am immune to gun laws on the state level, would be your reasoning.
You write... The Feds are not granted the power to run education. Under the Tenth, the States are reserved powers not delegated to Congress and that would include education.
This is true, lacking that immunity thing we just discussed.
You write... You're mixing Article I and the Tenth Amendment (State/Federal power) with P&I/BOR. You're saying that the fact that the Feds are not empowered to educate makes it a P&I. Again, very novel.
Nothing novel about it. You would like P&I to equal BOR, again, the 14th amend does NOT mention the BOR at all. So, when I go looking for P&I, I naturally do not focus ONLY on the BOR, which, again, was not mentioned in the 14th.
So Bork doesn't believe in ignoring it, but he thinks it should be left dead? I'd call that a Flip-Flop, wouldn't you?
My reasoning: Come, come now. Surely YOUR militia reasoning, which I admittedly like, is a bit convoluted.
Oh no it's not. You make it complicated for some reason. Didn't you agree "100 percent" and you really liked my reasoning? I'm tempted to call you on another Flip-Flop.
And what's wrong with my reasoning? I am IMMUNE from edu spending on the fed level, if I am to enjoy all my immunities evenly, then I am immune on the state level too.
No, there is no individual P&I issue in the division of powers. The Feds and States have their powers defined in Article I and the Tenth. There is no individual immunity from State or Federal education spending. The Feds are simply not granted such power. However, the States are reserved such powers, if they choose to exercise it.
It is PRECISELY the same reasoning as yours -- I am immune to gun laws on the fed level, therefore, I am immune to gun laws on the state level, would be your reasoning.
There is a Second Amendment that says the RKBA shall not be infringed. Where is the Clause which says, "shall not be illiterate"?
You write... The Feds are not granted the power to run education. Under the Tenth, the States are reserved powers not delegated to Congress and that would include education. This is true, lacking that immunity thing we just discussed.
Can we agree that Fed/State division of power is not a BOR/P&I issue?
You would like P&I to equal BOR, again, the 14th amend does NOT mention the BOR at all. So, when I go looking for P&I, I naturally do not focus ONLY on the BOR, which, again, was not mentioned in the 14th.
Then name some Privileges and Immunities of US citizens.