Perhaps a stupid constitutional question...

[RS Davis]

I was listening to the Sean Hannity Show on the radio today. Sean had on somebody who was saying that the First Amendment's protections against a State Religion applied only to the lawmakers in Congress, that the states were free to do as they pleased in their own constitutions.

[glow=red,2,300]Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[/glow]

Upon rereading the Bill of Rights, it seems he may have had a point. I know the traditional reading is that the first ten Amendments apply to individuals, and give across-the-board protection from all levels of government.

But there is something different about that First Amendment. Unlike the other nine, it specifies that Congress shall make no law, with no other qualifying information to deliniate it's role in restraining state governments. The others specifically enumerate rights that are not to be infringed upon, without specifically stating who the Amendment is to bind. This, I think, give the nine universality.

But if this strict reading is to be correct, this presents other problems. It would seem, then, that state governments also have the right to abridge your freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. That hardly seems what the founders would have wanted.

But, still, I am stuck on the language.

Any comments?

- Rick

[whatever]

One quick one, for now
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Don't tell the bastards!

[emilysrevolution]

So not the states of the US have to adhere to the laws of their federal government? Like marijuana laws for instance. The state may allow use but the federal government continues to override that.

[RS Davis]

whatever said:

One quick one, for now
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Don't tell the bastards!

Hahaha....okay, I'll keep it on the DL.

- Rick

[RS Davis]

emilysrevolution said:

So not the states of the US have to adhere to the laws of their federal government? Like marijuana laws for instance. The state may allow use but the federal government continues to override that.

I'm not sure I follow.

- Rick

[penguin]

RS said:

I was listening to the Sean Hannity Show on the radio today. Sean had on somebody who was saying that the First Amendment's protections against a State Religion applied only to the lawmakers in Congress, that the states were free to do as they pleased in their own constitutions.But, still, I am stuck on the language.

Any comments?

- Rick

I think that is the way it was intended, but if I'm not mistaken, they hold amendment XIV (section 1) broadens that.

[RS Davis]

penguin said:

I think that is the way it was intended, but if I'm not mistaken, they hold amendment XIV (section 1) broadens that.

[glow=red,2,300]

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[/glow]

It still seems rather vague. It doesn't explicitly mention the First Amendment or any of the things it protects. Still, it would seem to indicate that all rights secured by the Constitution are unabridgeable.

Thanks for the input. That was helpful.

- Rick

[outgirl]

I'm not very well versed on the constitution (hangs her head in shame) so ima stay outta this one. Sorry but I've been on the hip hop forum prior to this, hence the slang dawg.

[penguin]

RS said:

[glow=red,2,300]

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[/glow]

It still seems rather vague. It doesn't explicitly mention the First Amendment or any of the things it protects. Still, it would seem to indicate that all rights secured by the Constitution are unabridgeable.

Thanks for the input. That was helpful.

- Rick

Here is (so far) a very good book -- I'm about 1/3 through -- that sheds some light on the constitution, including the 14th amendment, that you might find interesting.

[RS Davis]

penguin said:

Here is (so far) a very good book -- I'm about 1/3 through -- that sheds some light on the constitution, including the 14th amendment, that you might find interesting.

Thanks, I'll check it out!

- Rick