Inhibitions upon the people, as in prohibition, infringe upon the Ninth Amendment.
The White House needs to openly acknowledge this and encourage the Courts to protection the entire constitution, including, and currently, especially, the Ninth Amendment.
To the people. Not the States. Like the 2nd. To the People.
Comments (9)
Can I have an example?
I briefly thought about finding one truly profound example but could not favor one over another because of the multiple nuances and complex history.
I also do not wish to turn a forum into my personal manifesto since I disregard those who do. :)
Best book: Restoring the lost Constitution, The Presumption of Liberty, Randy E. Barnett. In your local book stores now.
During Bork's confirmation hearings, he described the ninth amendment as an ink blot. The judicial system has seriously dissed the ninth amendment because it is a serious curb on government power. I think if you reference that in a search you'll find a considerable starting point on the web to get the flavor of it.
I'm sobi54 on gmail if you want more.
Do you have a real proposal then? Is this legislation?
It sounds to me like you're trying to change judicial interpretation, which is out of scope for this site, I think.
I do favor the socially and fiscally libertarian views of Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and their associates, so I think I support the premise.
What is the best way to change the culture of government to embrace collaboration?
I think recognizing the Ninth Amendment might go a long way.
You're right in that I seek to "improve" judicial interpretation, but I asked the White House to openly acknowledge that one of the top ten amendments is routinely ignored.
Seems fair enough.
If you see my other ideas, one is to challenge unconstitutional laws.
A great many laws are in violation of the constitution or beyond the scope of authorized powers.
Using the 9th Amendment provides proper challenging.
I forgot, I'm so curious as to why people vote against the 9th amendment.
???
:)
If people vote against this, its probably because they don't see a real proposal. Most of them probably do support the constitution until they are confronted by specific issues like gun control or certain forms of freedom of speech.
"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."
Abraham Lincoln (1809-65), U.S. President.
Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives
It is difficult to put this as a proposal for legislation since it is the law of the land.
Hard to make sense of a law that says obey the law.
However, anything posted on here is available for hijacking and improvement. Run with it. I vote you up.