“To be sure, when the Tenth Amendment uses the phrase -the people,- it does not specify whether it is referring to the people of each State or the people of the Nation as a whole. But the latter interpretation would make the Amendment pointless...it would make no sense to speak of powers as being reserved to the undifferentiated people of the Nation as a whole, because the Constitution does not contemplate that those people will either exercise power or delegate it. The Constitution simply does not recognize any mechanism for action by the undifferentiated people of the Nation...”
Just wondering if you were going to call Justice Thomas, the Chief Justice, Justice O'Connor, and Justice Scalia 'liars:' after all, they have stated, in print (quoted above for your edification ;>), that the people referred to by the Tenth Amendment are "the people of each State." Or will you continue to proclaim your "pointless" and 'nonsensical' argument that the amendment refers to "the people of the Nation as a whole?"
The world wonders...
;>)
“To be sure, when the Tenth Amendment uses the phrase -the people,- it does not specify whether it is referring to the people of each State or the people of the Nation as a whole. But the latter interpretation would make the Amendment pointless...it would make no sense to speak of powers as being reserved to the undifferentiated people of the Nation as a whole, because the Constitution does not contemplate that those people will either exercise power or delegate it. The Constitution simply does not recognize any mechanism for action by the undifferentiated people of the Nation...”
Just wondering if you were going to call Justice Thomas, the Chief Justice, Justice O'Connor, and Justice Scalia 'liars:' after all, they have stated, in print (quoted above for your edification ;>), that the people referred to by the Tenth Amendment are "the people of each State." Or will you continue to proclaim your "pointless" and 'nonsensical' argument that the amendment refers to "the people of the Nation as a whole?"
The world wonders...
I don't see you quoting Justice Story any more. I would surmise that this due to the fact that I quoted part of Martin v. Hunter's Lessee in which he categorically states that the people are the sovereigns of the county, and not the states.
As I said perhaps in another thread, I don't even quote Texas v White because it is post ACW. I can't imagine what this stuff from the modern court has to do with the crisis of disunion in the 19th century.
As you well know, Washington, Madison, Chief Justice Jay, Justice WIlson, Chief Justice Marshall, Andrew Jackson and many many others, including the loyal Union men who defended your right to spout this crap with their lives, saw things differently.
You are embarked on a disinformation campaign. Anyone who considers the whole record will not accept your interpretation. But, to humor, you, get back to me when Justice Scalia et al take a position that unilateral state secession is allowed under our laws.
Walt