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

To: Cboldt; EDINVA

>>I’m not going to read the entire statutory scheme for the community, and I urge you to not jumpt to the conclusion that “traffic” and “character of the neighborhood” are not legal criteia in what is enforcible, and what is not.<<

They were not cited for traffic problems.

They were cited for having “religious meetings” in their house.

What part of the First Amendment do you not understand?

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”


204 posted on 09/19/2011 2:17:54 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears ("But resist, we much...we must...and we will much...about...that...be committed." - Al Sharpton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies ]


To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

Um, Congress didn’t make this law; the municipality did.

Nothing in the Constitution prohibits a municipality from setting up its own zoning laws. And, one would imagine, this municipal law was in effect in San Juan Capistrano before the Fromms bought their house.


214 posted on 09/19/2011 2:31:21 PM PDT by EDINVA ( Jimmy McMillan '12: because RENT'S, TOO DAMN HIGH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | 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