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

To: Scenic Sounds
I guess, if we wanted to, we could do a U-turn and allow states to ignore freedoms described in the First Amendment, but how many people really want to do that?

I don't believe people would want to touch the First Amendment but they would probably want their soveriegnty back, which the Fourteenth Amendment steals from them.

80 posted on 09/01/2003 8:49:04 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: A2J; rottweiller_inc
I don't believe people would want to touch the First Amendment but they would probably want their soveriegnty back, which the Fourteenth Amendment steals from them.

Well, I don't want it thought that just some of our Supreme Court justices believe that the Fourteenth Amendment requires that states observe freedoms described in the First Amendment. They all do. It's no longer even considered an issue. For example, check out the majority opinion in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000). As you can see, that opinion was written by Chief Justice Rehnquist and joined in by Justices Scalia and Thomas (among others). The court held that the First Amendment's "freedom of association" precluded the State of New Jersey from enforcing a law which prohibited the Boy Scouts from discriminating against gay scout leaders.

So, it was because of the argument that states must observe First Amendment freedoms that the Boy Scouts are permitted to refuse to hire gay scout leaders in New Jersey.

Do you think that Scalia and Thomas are just plain wrong about all this? ;-)

86 posted on 09/01/2003 9:04:51 AM PDT by Scenic Sounds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | 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