1. Define "family".
2. The representative's are not even purporting to dictate who can live together as a family. They have simply legislated certain occupancy requirements for living in Black Jack. There is no requirement for these people to live in Black Jack. There is, however, a legal defintion of the word "family". The burden of proof is on the one who wants to change it.
they can petition for redress against an unconstitutional law. [see the 1st] This they will do, and win...
Yes, they can, but they will probably not win. See #65.
defending liberty is everyones business.
Define "liberty".
Cordially,
1. Define "family".
That's part of the point. Representatives have no power to define/dictate what is a family.
2. The representative's are not even purporting to dictate who can live together as a family. They have simply legislated certain occupancy requirements for living in Black Jack.
Bull. Thats not what the article says.
There is no requirement for these people to live in Black Jack.
Wrong. - There is no power to deny them living in Blackjack.
There is, however, a legal defintion of the word "family".
Just above you said the opposite; they are dictating "who can live together as a family".
The burden of proof is on the one who wants to change it.
Not true, -- they can petition for redress against an unconstitutional law. [see the 1st] This they will do, and win...
Yes, they can, but they will probably not win. See #65.
Apparently, the USSC refused to hear that issue, just as they refuse to hear infringements on our RKBA's. -- This is not a "win".
Defending liberty is everyones business.
Define "liberty".
I doubt you are capable of accepting any definition compatible to our Constitution, - so I won't bother.