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

To: Roscoe
Barron vs. Balitimore predates the 14th Amendment. Cruikshank and thus Presser rely in part on it. They are equally defective on that account. All of these cases point to the doctrine that the states do not need to obey the restrictions of the Bill of Rights. That doctrine has been overturned, but only for "favored" rights, by use of the due process and occasionally equal protection clauses of the 14th amendment, leaving the "priveleges and immunities" clause as an unwanted bastard, whereas in reality it was intended as the heart of the 14ths amendment's first section.
46 posted on 07/07/2003 4:44:22 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato
Really? Try demanding a jury trial in small claims court or a grand jury indictment in a case where a state provides for bringing a prosecution by information.
50 posted on 07/08/2003 12:03:39 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | 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