Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:01:05 PST From: mojavegnospamveg.iwvisp.com (Everett M. Greene) Subject: Re: Well, the convertible is on Ebay now.
Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospamcop.net> writes: > Everett M. Greene <mojavegnospamveg.iwvisp.com> wrote: > >> Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospamcop.net> writes: > > >> The feds don't have the authority to decide things like that for the > >> states, Everett. Do you want them trampling states' rights? > >> You can't break down that barrier just for the times you want to. > > > This wasn't a states' rights discussion. > > Sure it is. The claim was made that the SCOTUS said it was fine. Someone else might have said that, but it wasn't me. > They said no such thing, because they can't, because it's > not their call. It can be if they want it to be and can find Constitutional "cover" for it. And since the Supremes determine what the Contitution says... How do you think the interstate commerce clause got stretched way beyond recognition to cover discrimination? > > It was a thread > > about whether there are protections against taking of > > private property by the government > > Yes. > > > and the Supremes > > said that there isn't as much as some would like in the > > Federal constitution. > > That's quite a backpedal. From what? > >> But..., the SCOTUS has nothing to do with the legality > >> of that. > > > They do if it violates the "taking" clause (or any other > > part) of the U.S. Constitution. > > (sigh). Nevermind. Just think how much more effective > your anger would be if it was directed at the right people. What anger is that?
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
