"the right of the people"
The Bill of Rights is NOT negotiable.
- Thread starter Rune
- Start date
It indicates that the Bill of Rights is indeed negotiable. Every 'right' has limitations. That's what the Federal courts are for. It is literally their mission statement.
No it doesn't.
It indicates that you can't make a point without resorting to an absurd extreme.
NiftyNiblick
1960s Chick Magnet
Are we having another US Constitution circle jerk?
The fly-over country crackers really get off on that shit, don't they?
The fly-over country crackers really get off on that shit, don't they?
Because it drives home the point. You cannot own a machine gun. Better? The point is that I just infringed on your right to bear arms.
Drummie123
Verified User
I believe that if the Left succeeds in their goal to gain total control of US all, they will want to give us or deny us any and every right.
Who is 'the left'? Anyone that disagrees with you? I have no interest in total control. No one does. Except maybe for your Orange God. Stop whining, you aren't being denied ANYTHING. Why do you love to play victim so much.
yes they do. You can argue guns need to be banned for the general welfare
( I actually hate the damn things and would gladly see them gone) -
but the Bill of Rights guarantees individual regulated ownership
An exception to prior restraint is national security (which has never been applied).
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
Unlike other sections of the Constitution, SCOTUS rulings on 2nd Amendment issues have been consistent. Obviously you don't know that because you never graduated college.
That is why the Constitution prohibits government from limiting those rights (from the right or left). Both sides favor restrictions on those rights--just different restrictions.
I don't think it is their "mission statement" since there is nothing in the Constitution giving the courts the power to interpret it. The Courts gave themselves that power in Marbury v. Madison.
States were free to make any restrictions on the 2nd Amendment until 2010 when the Supreme Court made it applicable to the states.
BidenPresident
Verified User
"abcdefg"
The courts recognized that they had been given that power in Marbury v. Madison. And that power derives from the Constitution.
"Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution..."
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you think the federal courts are there to limit our rights????
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you CAN own a machine gun
SmarterthanYou
rebel
this is not completely correct. each state has their own constitutions that apply
I don't think the "judicial power" included interpretation of the Constitution. That is not the provision they used to justify judicial review. Much of it was political in that they were seeking a solution that did not make them look powerless.