HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » brush » Journal
Page: 1

brush

Profile Information

Member since: Sun Apr 1, 2012, 11:07 AM
Number of posts: 45,309

Journal Archives

IMO it's hypocrisy and cherry picking of amendments.

More justices needed on SCOTUS to counteract the Taliban 6.

Uh-oh, SCOTUS original constructionists of the Constitution...

better take a look at the 9th Amendment.

It being the 4th of July I thought I'd take a closer look at the Constitution and its amendments. The Second Amendment is of course hugely problematic, as is the EC provision, but Scalia and his disciples must have entirely skipped over THE 9TH AMENDMENT in their strict constructionist theorizing (or chose to ignore it), as it states as follows:

The Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that the federal government doesn't own the rights that are not listed in the Constitution, instead, they belong to the people. The 9th Amendment states that the rights not specified in the Constitution belong to the people, not the federal government.


Huh? WTF? Did I read that right? The Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that the federal government doesn't own the rights that are not listed in the Constitution, instead, they belong to the people. The 9th Amendment states that the rights not specified in the Constitution belong to the people, not the federal government.

So Alito's weak ass argument for striking down Roe because it's not mentionned in the constitution is in direct contradiction to the 9th Amendement, as is Scalia's Heller decision on guns, and all the other originalist claptrap being pushed by the SCOTUS Taliban 6.

I therefore move that blue state attorneys/legislatures immediately draw up bills and pass them that can be moved into the appropriate protocol through lower courts which lead to the Supreme Court taking it up—if they dare.
Go to Page: 1