To: robertpaulsen
That was the thinking at the time -- the "privileges or immunities" clause would encompass the rights of the people and the states would then be obligated to protect those rights under the 14th.
That was shot down by the U.S. Supreme Court the very first time it was tried in the Slaughterhouse Cases of 1873. Judicial-activist legislation from the bench is not a new phenomenon.
1,104 posted on
03/13/2007 7:32:58 AM PDT by
steve-b
(It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
To: steve-b
"-- Judicial-activist legislation from the bench is not a new phenomenon. --"
And as we see, lackey's that approve of judicial-activism from the bench are not a new phenomenon.
1,106 posted on
03/13/2007 8:17:27 AM PDT by
tpaine
(" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
To: steve-b
"Judicial-activist legislation"They struck down the law as unconstitutional. Where was the activism? Where was the judicial legislation?
Or do you just throw out buzzwords so posters think you know what you're talking about?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson