Re: [Libertarian] Re: Article 1. sec. 9

Tue, 02 May 2006 05:45:08 -0700

But neither section 8 nor section 9 mention slaves at all.  In fact section 9 specificly mentions persons.  Do you have a source for you interpretation.  Otherwise it would be best to go with the words as written.  Unless we can find some evidence of meaning of terms drifting as what happened with the word 'regulated' in the 2nd amendment.

BWS

From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Wrong.  It means after 1808, Congress may place prohibitions on the
> states in regard to the transport and importation of slaves, not
> immigration.  Migration is not immigration.
> --- In [email protected], "hrearden_hr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:>
> >
> >
> > Although the section of the article was refering to slaves the
> > wording of it means that after the year 1808 Congress can place
> > prohibitions on states in regard to migration. After 1808 in fact
> > Congress did enact legislation prohibiting slaves from being
> > transported to the U.S.A. Congress because of Article I sec.9 can
> > plase prohibitions on immigration. The part about a duty being
> > imposed on importation of persons is useless because slavery and
> > indentured servtitude have been abolished and thus people are no
> > longer transported to the U.S.A. as slaves or indentured servents as
> > payment for their passage. After 1808 it was illegal to transport
> > slaves to the U.S.A.
> >
> >                         $


ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian



SPONSORED LINKS
Libertarian English language Political parties
Online dictionary American politics

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to