Wrong with regard to state power.
1. See Art. I, Sec. 10. The phrase "No State shall..." appears 3 times, IIRC.
2. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Amendment XIV: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Constitutional Law is based on a formal document that defines broad powers. Federal constitutional law originates from the U.S. constitution. State constitutional law originates from the individual state constitutions.
Correct.
Statutes and Ordinances are legislation passed on the federal, state, or local levels.
Correct again.
The US constitution had no jurisdiction and was irrelevant to Ms. Herb's case and it is important for you to understand that.
Wrong.
Article VI: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
_______________________________
That's 2 out of 4 correct, with some fundamental misunderstandings in your incorrect answers. Recommended remedial reading:
dang
You're referring to the section that deals with trade, or a FEDERAL matter. Unless, you're trying to make a connection through interstate commerce? It's been done before, so who could blame you for trying again, but some of us conservatives haven't given up trying to point out that the interstate clause is a judicial over reach.
2. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people...
...should they decide that they want to define public decorum.
For instance, when the first draft of the first amendment was written, it was feared that it was too stringent and would force the closure of the then established state religions, demonstrating that the first amendment was to limit the federal establishment of religion, but not the state established religions.
I rest my case.
Article XIV: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Of course, we were talking about the first amendment and the framer's intent. Interesting that you are finally able to buttress your belief in the supremacy of the central government with the amendment that was fraudulently ratified by the "great centralizer 80 years later." It appears, however, that you missed this escape clause, "... any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Besides never being lawfully ratified, the fourteenth amendment has other problems in that it attempts to circumvent congressional ability to define the jurisdiction of the courts and making illegals equivalent to citizens. In summary, swearing at your toilet isn't polite social behavior, but let's not make a federal issue out of it, okay?