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

To: TonyInOhio
I think when they passed the bill they knew it would not hold muster under the Constitution. That is why they added that bit, that says if one part of the bill is unconstitutional they do not throw out the whole law.
11 posted on 05/02/2003 12:47:05 PM PDT by mware
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: mware
try doing that to a partial birth abortion ban bill however...
13 posted on 05/02/2003 12:47:41 PM PDT by KantianBurke (The Federal govt should be protecting us from terrorists, not handing out goodies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: mware
That is why they added that bit, that says if one part of the bill is unconstitutional they do not throw out the whole law.

I think there's some question whether that part itself is constitutional.

19 posted on 05/02/2003 12:50:03 PM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | 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