“The Constitution prohibits the Government from doing what some of these States have recently done.”
Doesn’t the Constitution prevent CONGRESS for doing what these States have done?
And doesn’t the 10th Amendment give States the power not specifically delegated to Congress?
I agree with you generally, but am a little confused.
Maybe a knowledgable 10th Amendment supporter can explain why the 10th Amendment doesn’t apply to the States on the issue of gun “control”.
It does because of incorporation.
The 10th Amendment argument sounds good to the left, but here is the sticky part. If Congress and the States cannot ignore the rights of the people under the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, then under what authority can they ignore their rights under the Second Amendment? Why is the 10th Amendment something that the States can use as an excuse to deprive people of their right to keep an bear arms? If the States, under the 10th Amendment can deprive people of their rights under one Amendment, then the States can deprive people of their rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, speedy trials, the right to an attorney, the right to privacy, and any other rights that they are presently BOUND and SWORN to UPHOLD AND DEFEND!
That argument raged on FR a while back. Some argue for full restoration of 10th, the other group argued that the 14th gave the right back to the people.
In the end it doesn’t matter, it only matters what laws they choose to enforce and what they choose to ignore.