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

To: tacticalogic

"there is no enumerated power who's original intent was to enable Congress to mandate the seizure of pornography by state or local police."

True, but because that power is not specifically forbidden to the states or the "people." As per the 10th ammendment, states can ban pornography and the Supreme Court should stay out of it. It was only "activist" judges that stole that power from the people.


177 posted on 11/21/2004 11:25:01 AM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]


To: Sola Veritas
True, but because that power is not specifically forbidden to the states or the "people." As per the 10th ammendment, states can ban pornography and the Supreme Court should stay out of it.

But that's not what's being proposed by the people in this article.

183 posted on 11/21/2004 12:43:14 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | 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