Quote:
Originally posted by geep
The problem with this Supreme Court edict is that it's based on a right to privacy which is noticeably undefined in the Constitution. Nowhere in the constitution is it mentioned, specifically. The closest mention it gets is in Amendment X:
This Supreme Court has effectively disregarded this Amendment by taking away a right from the states. By making a false assumption that the states do not have a right to enforce the lawful acts of their legislatures in the home of an individual and within the realm of the powers expressly given to it (or denied it) by the Constitution, the Court is reduced to a role of "judicial activism", not "Defender of the Constitution".
|
I'm, in all honesty, glad that the Courts have chosen to respect privacy, constituationally based or not.