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

To: robertpaulsen

I agree with you about the SC interpreting the CONS, but... it is criminal the way they've decided that the 14th applies the BOR to the states, and THEN they go about and say what applies and what does not and when it applies, etc. The 14th either did or did not make the BOR apply, if it did then we wouldn't need the court taking this step by step approach.


76 posted on 10/29/2004 8:43:31 AM PDT by RayStacy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]


To: RayStacy
"then we wouldn't need the court taking this step by step approach."

Actually, the Constitution itself forces us to do it this way.

The USSC cannot just decree that, for example, abortion is a right protected by the Constitution. Congress cannot check with the USSC prior to writing a statute to see if it's constitutional.

It is only after the fact that a case must wend its way through the system to eventually arrive at the USSC. And, even then, the USSC may choose not to hear it.

As the cases came before it, the USSC decided that a certain right was so fundamental to the concept of liberty, that due process demanded that the right be protected by the state.

It is this "due process' clause of the 14th amendment, not the privileges and immunities clause, that is used to "incorporate" a given right.

78 posted on 10/29/2004 8:53:02 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | 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