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

To: Demidog
The states were already obligated to refrain from infringing upon rights reserved to the people as the tenth amendment states explicitly.

Laughably wrong.

"But it is universally understood, it is a part of the history of the day, that the great revolution which established the constitution of the United States, was not effected without immense opposition. Serious fears were extensively entertained that those powers which the patriot statesmen, who then watched over the interests of our country, deemed essential to union, and to the attainment of those invaluable objects for which union was sought, might be exercised in a manner dangerous to liberty. In almost every convention by which the constitution was adopted, amendments to guard against the abuse of power were recommended. These amendments demanded security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government--not against those of the local governments." --United States Supreme Court, Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243 (1833)

407 posted on 06/15/2002 3:13:45 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies ]


To: Roscoe
Laughably wrong.

Yes, the supreme court was laughably wrong as are you. See US v Miller 1939 or Nunn v State, 1847.

411 posted on 06/15/2002 3:18:37 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | 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