« A timely book | Main | My new book, on Dred Scott »
"Sorry, New York. The Second Amendment applies outside the home"
A Washington Post letter to the editor from Joyce Malcolm.
2 Comments | Leave a comment
The government of New York has now infringed on the 2nd amendment to the point that it is not afraid to trample the rest of the people's rights. This has historically been the problem with state governments as shown by previous court cases involving incorporation of constitutional rights. These cases would never have been necessary if states had respected the rights of the people.
States have argued and won cases of federal overreach based on the tenth amendment. The tenth doesn't stop at states rights though, it sets a hierarchy of rights with rights of the people at the top.
For those that say state restrictions are ok, the 10th amendment makes a pretty plain statement about rights reserved to the people:
"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."
As I will continue to point out, the Supreme Court of the USA caused these problems with state laws. Marshall totally blew it with his call about the Bill of Rights. Madison did want to put the various parts in the original Constitution but was repudiated so any sentient being would then recognize that Madison's desires mean nothing to understanding the full meaning of the Bill of Rights. Those who cling to Madison should know that HE determined that Congress was NOT to set their own pay when the question arose in the 1787 Convention. See the Debates, it's there. So why not hold Congress to that standard.
Back to the Bill of Rights: Rawle (1825/29) taught in his View of the Constitution that the Bill of Rights bound ALL governmental entities, state and federal alike. Yet in 1833, the SC in Barron v Baltimore decided that NONE of the Bill of Rights bound the States, totally ignoring the supremacy clause and the FACT that nothing in Amendments 2 through 10 (actually 4-12) specifically applied solely to the federal government. In fact, current judicial decisions concerning the 1st Amendment are more incorrect. If the SC had properly understood and properly determined the extent of the Bill of Rights, that is to make sure the commonly held beliefs were to pass to new states, then the Bill of Rights would have been recognized as applying to all governments and we would not have this hodgepodge of laws at the state level. But then too the SC could not extraconstitutionally expand it authority be making correct decisions. By making decisions such as Barron, the court all but set their expansion on track to the lie it is today, that is being the ultimate arbiter of all. They ignore the fact that it is the People who are at the top level, NOT the judges. It is the People who have the final say but the People have been co-opted by systematic lies taught through government schools. Read Blackstone sometime a better grasp of the relationship of People to their government. Maybe a little De Juri Regni and of course Locke.