To: Viva Le Dissention
Either the 9th Amendment is read to mean essentially the same thing as the 10th--making it superfluous--or it is clearly stating that the Constitution is not to be read strictly within the "four corners." The Ninth Amendment was a constraint on the federal government , not a license for the federal courts, the third branch of the federal government, to make laws.
Or as Judge Bork once said, the Ninth Amendment is "...no more interpretable than a waterblot on the Constitution."
To: jwalsh07
The Ninth Amendment was a constraint on the federal government , not a license for the federal courts, the third branch of the federal government, to make laws. You're arguing my first point--that the 9th Amendment is essentially the same as the 10th. I find it very difficult to believe the Founders would include a superfluous amendment, so I don't buy that explanation.
To: jwalsh07
"The Ninth Amendment was a constraint on the federal government , not a license for the federal courts, the third branch of the federal government, to make laws."
That is a good way to say it.
851 posted on
08/21/2003 7:54:17 PM PDT by
WOSG
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson