Supreme Court's Sinister Six appears to shoot themselves in their collective feet and guarantee a Democratic landslide

[LTG]

54. Thoughts on Federal vs States rights and the Constitution

The Constitution’s not only set forth the structure of our government but specifies what powers are given to it and restricts the federal exercise of any powers not specifically granted to it by the states and the people.

First - Specify the nature and structure of the 3 branches of government and the duties, powers and jurisdiction of each. It also detailed the process of selection of its principal officers and officials, laying out their individual qualifications, duties and powers.

Second - Enumerate and restrict federal government powers to areas specifically set forth and permitted to it by the Constitution. All non-enumerated powers are reserved to the states or the people.

Third - It specifies the only methods by which the Constitution and be amended in any way. It creates a process that was intentionally not easily nor hastily accomplished

The Bill of Rights was to protect the natural rights and freedoms of all citizens from the actions and interference of the government

Essentially, to be constitutional all federal laws must fall within one of the constitutionally enumerated powers. That’s why you sometimes find somewhat tortured connections between a law or legal opinion and an enumerated power. Many federal laws rest on the federal power over interstate commerce.

It’s the basis of arguments whether a firearm homemade in a state and only possessed in that state would still fall under federal firearms laws. Basically the court decided it wasn’t strictly the federal firearms laws themselves that created federal supremacy and jurisdiction, but rather that they rested upon Interstate Commerce, an enumerated power.

The reasoning was that since it had been made, even though by a citizen for personal use and not sale, its existence still impacted interstate commerce.

The court could also, I’m sure, have crafted a rational argument that many things are made by individuals for personal use and never intended to be sold. If not homemade the citizen may not have ever purchased one. Without support under Interstate Commerce the court might have ruled the prosecution outside the powers of the federal government and therefore unconstitutional.

The federal government can not simply give themselves the authority, by passing a law, in areas with no underlying enumerated power. Over the years the courts have managed to find a nexus to something connected to an enumerated federal power to create federal jurisdiction when it served either the law or their desire to so rule.

That all being said, I’m sure there are in fact things local jurisdictions could make criminal even if the feds disapprove. I just haven’t thought deeply enough into it to come up with one this late at night, or rather early in the morning.

The main thing that set this all off was to correct the notion that while the Constitution and any Treaties or laws made pursuant to its provisions are the supreme law of the land, it only means those made pursuant to the limitations of the enumerated powers.

The Constitution’s was written to restrict federal powers. All powers of government not given the federal government specifically by the Constitution belong to the states and the people.