4a2c5228   
   XPost: alt.politics.religion, alt.politics.usa.constitution, misc.education   
   From: strabo@flashlight.net   
      
   On 10/21/2010 1:54 PM, cpt banjo wrote:   
   > On Oct 21, 11:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty Everyth...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com>  wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >> So applying an amendment to the people and the States when it is clearly   
   >> directed at ONLY the Federal government, would violate the 9th Amendment.   
   >   
   > Hogwash.  The 9th doesn't protect rights retained by the States, only   
   > those retained by the people.  The 14th is, and was intended to be, a   
   > limitation on State Power.  Moreover, since the 14th was adopted after   
   > the 9th, it trumps the 9th to the extent of any conflict.   
   >   
      
   If a proposed amendment is in conflict with an existing power,   
   the proposed is unconstitutional.  The 16th and 17th amendments   
   are examples of unlawful proposals. Otherwise each amendment   
   stands alone and the order of amendments is irrelevant.   
      
      
   >   
   >> Anything unwritten in the original version, is NOT a law   
   >   
   > Nonsense.  The Constitution doesn't explicitly provide for judicial   
   > review, but it's been the law for over 200 years.  We've had court-   
   > made law in the Anglo-American legal system for over 600 years.   
    >   
      
   Find such a law and I'll break it.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)