|
With all due respect, Eugene is missing a critical point here. The U.S.
Constitution may, and does, define rights that apply to both
the national and state governments, and indeed, to all officials
everywhere and at all times. That is what natural rights mean. But it
can also not create a jurisdiction for federal courts to decide
cases between a citizen and his state on such rights. The state courts
are expected to enforce the rights, and state citizens may correctly
cite the U.S. Constitution as requiring that they do, and impeach and
remove state officials for neglecting or refusing to do so, as a
violation of their oaths to uphold the U.S. Constitution. They just
don't have the recourse of taking it to federal courts. It is simply not correct to say that if the federal courts do not have jurisdiction over a case on certain issues that the states may do whatever they want, and are not bound by the U.S. Constitution. This is a distinction that was clear to the Founders. That it is not clear to many lawyers and judges today is a testimony to how far our political culture has drifted from original understanding. -- Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------- Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
