Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
You guys are more informed than judges on the federal bench, who if they disagree with you, are (in the words of dk) "manipulating the judiciary."
|
it's not hard to conclude that we do when we see cases like slaughterhouse, dred scot, wickard v. filburn, kelo, and Dickerson v. Gretna police and Jefferson County Parish Sheriffs office just to name a few.
---------- Post added at 03:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:51 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel_
Sorry - I think you're wrong.
There is government funding for translation services, for equal operortunity programmes, for all manner of health and educational needs that are different depending on the race and languages of the population in an area.
Does Alaska need as much to spend on Spanish translation as New Mexico? Proboably not.
Does Montana have the same need for treatment facilities for cycle cell patients as Georgia? Unlikely.
I contend that knowing the racial make up of the population IS important for apportionment, and therefore is constitutional by your definition.
|
all of your instances are something that the feds should be forcing the states to do through the 14th Amendment, not taxing and spending on their own.