Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smooth
why are you shocked?
Originally the Bill of Rights only applied to the feds.
Then the 14th amendment passed.
So we think the Bill of Rights applies to the States (I don't think *all* of the rights have been found to apply, btw).
DC isn't a state.
The minority opinion is most likely the correct legal interpretation.
It's definately factually correct.
|
I'm not following your BoRights logic here.
First, the Bill of rights applied to the people. Not the feds. It restricted what any legislature could do to the people.
The "constitution" determined what the feds ~could~ do....and left everything else to the states, except as restricted by the Bill of Rights.
Of course since both the "compelling government interest" and "interstate commerce" doctrines have been expanded to essentially eliminate any rights the government (federal, or otherwise) determines, at it's sole discretion, are too cumbersome.
But what does the 14th have to do with anything? (Yes I just read it...all 5 sections worth...whew that's a long amendment)
And why would DC, not being a state, yet still being subject to the jurisdiction of the United Sates, be able to violate the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights...I mean aside from the fact that those pesky rights are just too burdensome?
-bear