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

To: freeandfreezing
The Court ruling applies the 1st Amendment to a California anti-discrimination law that has the effect of forcing a baker to engage in speech they do not want to. There is a long history of applying constitutional provisions to state laws which violate them.

You aren't listening: the 1st Amendment CANNOT apply to any other governmental entity than Congress without itself being amended; no such amendment exists. The courts claim that the 14th Amendment does so (called incorporation) but here's the thing: If the 14th applies the 1st to the States, Counties, and Municipalities… then there is no effect because these entities have no Congress — to make such application have some sort of effect the 1st must be altered in some manner other than merely applying the text to those entities.

Thus we see that this incorporation is really the ad hoc alteration of the 1st Amendment (and the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights) — and thus we see that the Courts have usurped power away from the Constitution, rebelling against their appointed place, which DOES NOT INCLUDE LEGISLATION OR AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION. As per Art. 1, Sec. 1: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

So, no — this ruling, though it has an end result you agree with, only serves to further erode the Constitution.

39 posted on 02/07/2018 10:08:35 AM PST by Edward.Fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


Elena Kagan, join the ranks...


40 posted on 06/05/2018 6:07:03 PM PDT by GOP Congress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | 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