I am the author. I have as I stated before run this past several lawyers,all of whom said the arguments were efficable. Amend.I Smoking is a free speech issue in the same way burning the flag is. Freedom of Speech is a braodly defined activity.
Amend.V The customer IS allowed to see smoking, in actual fact or by the posting of a sign stating smoking is allowed. Smoking is a legal activity, OSHA has stated SHS is not present in sufficient quantities to cause health concerns.
Amend.IX bad faith in this case means intentional deception or dishonesty. The bans are based on bad faith and the constitution should not be supporing anything of the kind.
Amend.X You are correct, it should have read, ...to the poers of the government. One of the few times the government could exercise such power is during the time of martial law.
I just can't agree with this one.
Until, and unless, smoking becomes a political expression the way burning the flag might be, I just can't see smoking as a right under Amend I
I agree with Amend V and X.
Ament IX - maybe, but whether or not the Constitution should support, or not, not ALL bans are based on bad faith.
Most implented by health boards would meet this criteria. Those, like in Florida that amended the state constitution, I believe, are valid, whether I like them or not.