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

To: cherrycapital
The 9th Amendment via the 14th prevents the states from violating the rights of individuals.

Once again, SCOTUS has seldom cited the 9th. Try again.

The 10th Amendment prevents the government from violating the rights of states or individuals.

Now, if the fedgov, through the 9th, were to define something to be a federal right that was not enumerated by the Constitution and not allocated to the fedgov, then the 10th is cheapened - or even destroyed if it happens enough. And what's next? Does healthcare become a right, and the fedgov usurps power over medical resoures that belongs to the individual? It's no different, usurping state power or usurping the rights of individuals - you may applaud the work of the federal Frankenstein today, but don't be surprised when it turns on you tomorrow.

I don't think sodomy should be outlawed by the states. But I also don't think it is a federal right or issue to be imposed on the states.

36 posted on 07/07/2003 1:18:46 PM PDT by dirtboy (Not enough words in FR taglines to adequately describe the dimensions of Hillary's thunderous thighs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: dirtboy
And I believe sexual association is an unenumerated right, which is my private opinion, but there is plenty of precedent for the idea that privacy is an unenumerated right. See Goldberg's opinion in Griswold, e.g.
48 posted on 07/07/2003 2:05:34 PM PDT by cherrycapital
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | 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