[Quiller]

In the above article, the Ninth Circuit was ruling on a California state law, which is not affected by the second amendment (which only applies to the federal government).

This implies that you believe the Constitution applies only to the federal government, not the states. Does that mean, therefore, you believe it would be okay for the states (but not the federal government) to pass laws restricting free speech, or abrogating protections from search and seizure, etc.?

You would have a stronger position if you said the states could pass laws regarding religion (since the first amendment does say Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof and does not specifically prohibit the states from doing so.

[robertpaulsen]

Hmmmm. Let me turn this right back at you.

If the first amendment states that, "Congress shall pass no law ...", then why does the first amendment apply to the states? It specifically says "Congress".

See my post #114.