In a message dated 4/2/00 2:16:53 PM Central Daylight Time,
> But only in that most courts today seem to have total ignorance or
> distain for the 9th Amendment, and are drifting away from the founders
> concepts of Natural Law. Under the 9th, any rights not enumerated in the
> Constitution are retained by the people, as individuals, so it follows
> that since privacy is not explicitly mentioned, it is a 9th Amendment
I don't read the IXth ammendment this way. The text says:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others
retained by the people.
I'm no constitutional law scholar, but this just seems to say "The fact that
a subject is addressed in the Constitution doesn't mean that it excludes
other rights the people may have," or alternatively, "the Constitution is not
an exhaustive enumeration of rights."
Are you thinking of the Xth ammendment?
The powers not delegated to the United States
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states,
are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Which I have always taken to simply mean that the Founders intended that the
federal government be a LIMITED government, with only explicitly enumerated
powers. (The Xth ammendment has always seemed a little foggy in it's last
clause -- probably intentionally so -- as to the division of power between
people and states . . .)
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<firstname.lastname@example.org>
Attorney ::: Vice President, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
ICQ # 61112550
"We never stop investigating. We are never satisfied that we know
enough to get by. Every question we answer leads on to another
question. This has become the greatest survival trick of our species."
-- Desmond Morris
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:01 MDT