PDA

View Full Version : Groundbreaking US Supreme Court decision on the Tenth Amendment



Ares
19th June 2011, 08:38 PM
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of the best and most important decisions ever on federalism. The Court unanimously held that not just states but individuals have standing to challenge federal laws as violations of state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment. This decision is as radical in the direction of liberty as the New Deal was radical in the direction of socialism. Click here (http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=14350782&msgid=139912&act=XSOF&c=746222&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourt.gov%2Fop inions%2F10pdf%2F09-1227.pdf) to read the decision.

In short, freedom advocates like us just got a green light from the USSC to bring more cases under the 10th Amendment. This will have huge—positive—implications for freedom so long as the current constitution of the court holds.



Here is our favorite passage: “Federalism secures the freedom of the individual. It allows States to respond, through the enactment of positive law, to the initiative of those who seek a voice in shaping the destiny of their own times without having to rely solely upon the political processes that control a remote central power.” We will put this precedent to work immediately when we file our opening brief in the Obamacare lawsuit Monday, and also in our defense of Save Our Secret Ballot against the NLRB challenge, and many more cases to come.


One other important note: Sometimes little cases make big constitutional law. This case involved a woman who was prosecuted under federal law for harassing her husband’s girlfriend—not the set of facts ordinarily creating an important precedent. Some of our cases, too, are seemingly “little” but with big principles at stake.


Freedom is making strides in the courtroom, and we’ll do our best to keep that momentum going. Thank you for your support that makes it possible.

http://arizonateaparty.ning.com/profiles/blogs/goldwater-institute

General of Darkness
19th June 2011, 08:40 PM
I don't believe it.

Ares
19th June 2011, 09:01 PM
I don't believe it.

Here's the PDF of the supreme courts decision

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1227.pdf

7th trump
19th June 2011, 09:17 PM
All boils down to being a federal US citizen.
US citizens dont get access to the 9th or 10th amendments anyway. Its right in the very document the Senate uses to interpret the US Constitution for those who volunteer or not under the jurisdiction of the 14th amendment.
Only the political group known as the "People" have access to those two amendments.
Congress made it quite clear that anyone within their jurisdiction do not get many of the Bill of Rights.........thats why the Civil Rights Act of 1866 came about!

So you can now challenge the government in questioning a few laws you must obey under their jurisdiction............so what and big freaken deal.......you could always challenge the government anyway.
Nothing new here...........move along!

goldleaf
20th June 2011, 11:13 AM
I'm sure glad most people aren't as negative as you!

7th trump
20th June 2011, 11:27 AM
I'm sure glad most people aren't as negative as you!

Nope, just brutally honest about many things and this is one of them.

Twisted Titan
20th June 2011, 11:51 AM
The ruling is nothing.........the enforecement is everything.....the thugs will abide as long as they mainain the upper hand

MAGNES
20th June 2011, 10:13 PM
Redress .

iOWNme
21st June 2011, 02:04 PM
Can someone here describe to me how States Rights is different than Democracy?

If 51% of the people in a State vote to subvert my Bill of Rights, is it Lawful?

IMO, States Rights was a British ploy of divide and conquer. NO STATE has the 'Right' to subvert my Creator endowed rights, or any other State's peoples rights. This is why we have LAW.

The 10th Amendment was not instituted so that the majority could run the minority. In fact, it was created for the exact OPPOSITE reason.

Not to mention the fact that ALL STATES are not only bankrupt, but are in receivership to the Feds since 1933. No STATE; created by the Feds; has any meaningful way of standing up. Everything is smoke and mirrors.

palani
21st June 2011, 02:44 PM
Can someone here describe to me how States Rights is different than Democracy?

If 51% of the people in a State vote to subvert my Bill of Rights, is it Lawful?

IMO, States Rights was a British ploy of divide and conquer. NO STATE has the 'Right' to subvert my Creator endowed rights, or any other State's peoples rights. This is why we have LAW.

The 10th Amendment was not instituted so that the majority could run the minority. In fact, it was created for the exact OPPOSITE reason.

Not to mention the fact that ALL STATES are not only bankrupt, but are in receivership to the Feds since 1933. No STATE; created by the Feds; has any meaningful way of standing up. Everything is smoke and mirrors.

Don't be confusing the government with the State. Should you choose to accept the office then YOU would be the State. Should you not choose the office then the government will step in to assist you in your governance. Those who choose to not be self-determined will have their direction chosen for them by the majority. Probably just as well as they have failed a critical test.