PAT wrote:
Someone on FourthTurning came up with a very sensible idea. It was that the only time the federal government should interfere with state law is if the state is violating the Bill of Rights. (This does not restrict the power of the feds to regulate air traffic, public health, etc...we're talking about laws affecting individual liberties.) And that every Constitutional amendment from #1 on down should carry the proviso, now used for the newest ones, that "the Congress shall have the power to enforce this amendment."
I have no problem with this, but it doesn't address the greater problem - an executive that considers himself above the bill of rights and possibly, with its new justices, a Supreme Court that might agree with him.
Living in a fantasy world - you say that like it's a bad thing.
Or, because I have ideals does that make me a starry-eyed idealist? -- Doug _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
