If where you live a state law was passed that made it “legal” to take all the property of people with the screenname “nicmarlo,” would the federal government have a duty to step in to rein in the unconstitutional actions of your state?
If there are actions taken at the state level, which contradict what is in the United States Constitution, then it is defacto unconstitutional and should be without force and effect.
However, we saw that, in the case of Terri Schiavo, the judge issued rulings that were in direct contradiction to the U.S. Constitution. His unConstitutional orders should have not have been acted upon...but they were.
No they would not. Nicmarlo would have an obligation to take it to the courts- even to the SC if need be.
Beautiful how it all works together isn’t it? If we just work the system the right way, the rights of individuals AND states are protected with no erosion of liberty.
A law specifically aiming to punish an individual is 'a bill of attainder' and is specifically unconstitutional. The courts would obviously strike down such a law.