Yeah here he is giving an explanation for why we have the 10th amendment and all of the principles and ideologies related to it. And his explanation says it’s a project to enforce white Christian nationalism. Historians argue about that stuff all the time. None of them attribute it to an ideology that didn’t exist at the time and in fact COULDN’T have existed at the time. I mean, that ideology is a reaction to forces that were generations away.
I completely missed how this was a discussion about what the FFs meant when drafting the 10th Amendment. I thought Jitty was responding to bigredfutbol's comment about what "states' rights" means generally. But I suppose I should let them speak for themselves.
Maybe. Most 10th Amendment (at least recent) jurisprudence involves anti-commandeering cases concerning regulatory issues and have little to do with what one traditionally thinks of as states' rights. Prior to that the majority of Supreme Court cases in which the 10th Amendment was invoked stated that "it was but a truism."
I give the FFs a lot of credit for what they did & the foresight to write a "living document" Not perfect just as they weren't. It's been emulated by a good number of democracies since it's been written But Canada's may be more in vogue these days. (Wiki) According to a 2012 study by David Law of Washington University in St. Louis published in the New York University Law Review, the influence of the U.S. Constitution may be waning. The study examined more than 700 federal constitutions from nearly 200 countries. "Rather than leading the way for global constitutionalism, the U.S. Constitution appears instead to be losing its appeal as a model for constitutional drafters elsewhere," the researchers write. "The idea of adopting a constitution may still trace its inspiration to the United States, but the manner in which constitutions are written increasingly does not." In particular, the study found that the U.S. Constitution guarantees relatively few rights compared to the constitutions of other countries and contains less than half (26 of 60) of the provisions listed in the average bill of rights. It is also one of the few in the world today that still features the right to keep and bear arms; the only others are the constitutions of Guatemala and Mexico. Overall, the research suggests that the Constitution of Canada, revised in 1982, is now a leading international model rather than that of the United States. Also Franklin was a great judge of human nature: “In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government, but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and believe further, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government.” https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/constitutionalconvention-september17.htm
A huge part of that is people find tearing it up and creating a new one sacrilegious. The FFs expected it be revised. They didn't expect the document to be lionized.
Yes. I am a fan of the Strict Scrutiny critique of recent conservative jurisprudence that concepts like "states rights" and "originalism" are invoked to achieve the pre-determined outcome and not in any legally consistent way. IIRC the ladies gave an example of this recently in relation to the Colorado case where they outlined how the court was invoking these concepts in various cases to have it both ways
Of course......Good luck with that, ************************.... Trump Tells Arizona Lawmakers to Repeal Abortion Ban Donald Trump on Friday urged Arizona lawmakers to act “as fast as possible” to adjust the state’s abortion policy after a state Supreme Court ruling upheld an 1864 law and made performing the procedure a felony, The Hill reports.
A recent Wall Street Journal poll of seven battleground states “found that 39% of suburban women cite abortion as a make-or-break issue for their vote — making it by far the most motivating issue for the group.” “Nearly three-quarters of them say the procedure should be legal all or most of the time, and a majority thinks Trump’s policies are too restrictive.” New York Times: Republican women are divided on abortion as Bans spread.
Wait until they lose access to all contraceptives. And having bank accounts in their name. Or credit cards. Or all the other rights RGB helped give them over the past 50 years or so.
Nah, keep it in place. Don't let them be half conservative. And don't let Trump untie himself from standard conservative thinking turned operating procedure. Arizona's been wanting to do this to women for generations. Trump made it possible. I doubt it would depress them. It might make them think we have a bit too much love for the gun.
lol yup. Right after they vote for Biden because of abortion they'll become Spurs fans because of Harry Kane.
I didn't necessarily agree with Jitty, but I took him to mean that the State's Rights ideology now largely serves a Christian nationalist purpose. "States rights" isn't really in the Constituion.
That took me a while to get. Well played. I feel badly for Kane, for real. Dude plays his ass off and failure follows him everywhere he goes anyway. Can somebody get him to endorse Trump?
...and that it was the actions of modern-day conservatives, not the thoughts of the writers, that he was talking about.
Another example of Republicans changing the rules if they’re losing, this time wrt the Az Supreme Court https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...reme-court-justices-from-removal/73374965007/
Keep talking Donald.... Trump Says Roe’s Demise ‘Working Out Very Well’ “Donald Trump took his boast about overturning Roe v. Wade to a critical swing state Tuesday, even as he was stuck in court in New York City,” Los Angeles Magazine reports. Said Trump: “When you look at it and you look at what’s happening all over the country now, states are voting. Ohio just voted. All different by the way. It’s tailor made, and it’s really working out well for people and they’re very, very happy.”
Arizona's Senate has passed the law repealing the 1864 abortion law that the Arizona Supreme Court said was the applicable state law. All 14 Democrats and 2 Republicans voted for the repeal, while the other 14 Republicans voted against it. Arizona's Governor is expected to sign the repeal as soon as it arrives on her desk. A statute banning abortions after 15-weeks is now the rule in Arizona. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/may/01/democrat-close-repeal-arizona-abortion-ban