Really? Anyone remember Little Rock? Brown v. Board? How successful was Orval Faubus when it came to defying the federal government? For that matter, how successful was Jefferson Davis?
Faubus was denying the right of a kid to go to school. He gave up to federal force, yes, but never appealed. - Why? Because he didn't have enough political support. - He should have fought it, and commited political suicide, -- just as the south commited constitutional suicide.
---------------------------
They never have had the power to violate individual rights.
The states? How applicable was the Sixth Amendment right to counsel before the 14'th Amendment and Gideon? If a person has a right to counsel, but is denied that by the state, surely that right is being violated, isn't it?
I don't have a clue as to what point you are attempting to make. Sorry.
---------------------------
You disagree with some of the personal freedoms guaranteed by the 14th, so you wish to blame the constitutional process it outlines.
I do? I didn't think so. I merely point out that if the 9'th is revived, there is a significant danger that it will be abused by activist judges, under the auspices of incorporation via the 14'th.
Revived? - Its never been dead. - Again, a state can argue such 'abuses' literally forever before the USSC, and in the meantime ignore enforcing them on their citizens. - Civil disobedience works.
IE - The troops at Little Rock could not have put the whole town in jail for refusing to allow their kids to attend integrated schools.
There's nothing wrong with either amendment in isolation, IMO, but when you put the two together, it becomes a very powerful and very dangerous way for people with a particular agenda to impose their values on the nation as a whole.
And without the BoR's we would see such agendas imposed on entire states.
That's okay - I'll walk you through it.
Revived? - Its never been dead. - Again, a state can argue such 'abuses' literally forever before the USSC...
Not on the Ninth or Tenth, they can't. It's dead as a matter of Constitutional law, even if folks still have some attachment to it.
...and in the meantime ignore enforcing them on their citizens. - Civil disobedience works. IE - The troops at Little Rock could not have put the whole town in jail for refusing to allow their kids to attend integrated schools.
That's a fairly easy thing to say, especially fifty years removed. Might I suggest that the folks on the ground at the time had a better sense of what their practical options were?
Do you have the opinion that states were not originally subject to the first ten amendments?
You are familiar with Gitlow v. New York, yes?
As for your post #146, I'm sorry - it's my turn not to follow you. I just don't see how you derive from that exchange the idea that I somehow favor the states being able to contravene the BoR. You are refuting an argument I don't make...