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

To: unlearner
Barnett wrote:
"As we all know, this arrangement was fundamentally changed by the enactment of the fourteenth amendment after the civil war. Today, if a state government infringes upon a right the people retained against their respective states, there is no jurisdictional barrier preventing federal protection of this right."

Not exactly. Federal government has the power to be sure that states protect each person within their respective jurisdictions equally. That means a state cannot make one set of laws for white people and another set for black people. It does not give federal government jurisdiction over rights and powers not enumerated. It only concerns equality.

-- All the privileges, immunities & rights to life, liberty, or property mentioned by the 14th are enforceable, according to its last clause.
-- But of course, you simply reject that concept. -- Have you ever sworn an oath to support the Constitution? -- Did that include support for the BOR's & the 14th?

I reject your interpretation of the 14th to encompass unenumerated rights.

You are rejecting the fact that our Constitution demands [in Article VI] that sworn officials at every level support & defend our Constitution, notwithstanding any State laws to the contrary.. - State laws that would infringe on unenumerated rights as well as enumerated.

You come across as if disagreeing makes me unpatriotic.

If you've ever sworn such an oath, [and most of us have, in some capacity] then logically it included support for the BOR's & the 14th.

500 posted on 07/09/2005 3:13:35 PM PDT by musanon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies ]


To: musanon

"You are rejecting the fact that our Constitution demands [in Article VI] that sworn officials at every level support & defend our Constitution, notwithstanding any State laws to the contrary.. - State laws that would infringe on unenumerated rights as well as enumerated."

By asking the federal government to stay out of issues not under its jurisdiction I am supporting the Constitution.

If a state violates an unenumerated right, the elected representatives or judges should fix the problem. If they do not, the citizens of that state should make them fix it. If the citizens do not, the only way the federal government should be involved is to specify the unenumerated right as protected through a Constitutional amendment. That is exactly what happened with slavery.

The only jurisdiction federal courts have over the protection of unenumerated rights is that they are protected equally with due process.

If a right is not enumerated we do not need a federal court to "find" it. That is exactly what has happened on abortion and, more recently, sodomy. The courts also seem to have found a right not to be offended by someone else's public display of religion.


501 posted on 07/09/2005 3:50:18 PM PDT by unlearner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | 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