Corrupted media attacks Ron DeSantis for embracing federalism and Tenth Amendment

.

See: Ron DeSantis Is Luring Supreme Court Conservatives to Overturn Landmark Precedent Again

Note how MSN deludes its audience by identifying our Supreme Court’s subjugation of federalism and the Tenth Amendment in 2008 by its reference to “Ron DeSantis Is Luring Supreme Court Conservatives to Overturn Landmark Precedent Again”.

But the fact is, our S.C. in Kennedy v. Louisiana erroneously applied the Eight Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause to state action, when it was intentionally agreed upon and ratified to prohibit federal actions. How do I know this to be true?

Because the Resolution of the First Congress Submitting Twelve Amendments to the Constitution; March 4, 1789 confirms this to be true!

“THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added”.

The fact is, the first ten amendments agreed to by the States were “declaratory and restrictive clauses” directed at the newly created federal government and not State governments or their actions.

Additional evidence is James Madison, speaking with reference to the adoption of these specific amendments, which confirms their adoption was to preserve and protect “federalism”, our Constitution’s big-tent system which reserves to the States and people therein, all powers not delegated to Congress. He says:

“It cannot be a secret to the gentlemen in this House, that, notwithstanding the ratification of this system of Government by eleven of the thirteen United States, in some cases unanimously, in others by large majorities; yet still there is a great number of our constituents who are dissatisfied with it; among whom are many respectable for their talents and patriotism, and respectable for the jealousy they have for their liberty, which, though mistaken in its object, is laudable in its motive. There is a great body of the people falling under this description, who at present feel much inclined to join their support to the cause of Federalism ___See :Madison, June 8th, 1789, Amendments to the Constitution

Getting back to the Tenth Amendment and federalism, the question may arise as to what powers have been reserved to the States and people therein, and the answer to that question is found in Federalist Papers No. 45 which summarizes those powers as follows:

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."

Of course, there are specific exceptions and limitations to such powers, and they are enforceable upon the states by the federal government. One such exception is the Fourteenth Amendment which prohibits State laws which make a distinction based upon race, color or previous condition of slavery, and is part of the intended purpose for adding this particular amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, to our constitution.

The bottom line is, our corrupted media, and those who detest the protection of federalism, our Constitution’s design, and likewise have a hatred for Governor DeSantis, who i might add takes his oath to support and defend our federal Constitution seriously, are the real culprits, intent on overturning the ultimate “precedent” which is the Constitution of the United States of America.

JWK

"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858.

Why doesn’t this apply to the 8th Ammendment?

If only someone could get rid of Justice Thomas, the SCOTUS might not make such constitutional rulings anymore. :wink:

7 Likes

Specifically, the bills seek to broaden the death penalty to sexual battery crimes against children.

Who is it that gives a rat’s ass about anyone who’d sexually abuse a child? The death penalty is way to easy. I’d rather put their hand in a garbage disposal, turn it on and force it right down to their shoulder. Then I’d start on the other hand. Their screams should be recorded and played on every MSM outlet. I’d wager, sexual crimes against children would be drastically reduced. Now…which do you care about the most…an innocent child or a child molester? I’m on the side of the innocent child…how about you?

4 Likes

You either support the government grinding people’s arms off or you support child molesters? Interesting choice. You don’t see grinding arms off as cruel and unusual punishment?

1 Like

Amendment

I actually care about the 8th Amendment. We shouldn’t be torturing people in this country.

Advocating barbarity does not put you on the side of the child.

1 Like

Y_actually

The OP may wish to stop and reconsider this.

If you unincorporate the 8th Amendment.

Somebody else will be happy to unincorporate the 2nd Amendment.

Let’s not start ■■■■ that won’t end well.

NOW

Rather than the rash idea of disincorporating the 8th Amendment.

How about the MUCH BETTER idea of properly interpreting it.

The Warren Court shredded the 8th Amendment beyond all recognition.

By the common law as it was understood in 1790/1792, cruel and unusual was a prohibition against deliberately tortuous punishments and punishments not authorized by the legislature.

The question of who could be executed and at what ages and what mental conditions would have been decided by the legislature. The question of what crimes carry the death penalty would be decided by the legislature.

The evolving standards of society is not a component of the 8th Amendment, under a proper interpretation. Indeed, the application of evolving standards of society, if indeed they are actually evolving at all, is a question that solely belongs with the legislature.

Under a proper interpretation of the 8th Amendment, truly barbaric and tortuous punishments would remain forbidden.

Would you let your friends walk around with spinach in their teeth? You would, wouldn’t you.

1 Like

See? Not an “m” party.

1 Like

Your premise is wrong at the outset. How can one unincorporate the Eight Amendment which was never incorporated from the beginning?

JWK


The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it.
_____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

Can they molest a child ever again if they don’t have hands? Problem solved…amirite? :sunglasses: :tumbler_glass:

Uh, yes, you don’t need hands to molest a child. So no, the problem wouldn’t be solved, and we would have a nightmare government. Would you really trust the Biden administration or the Newsom administration with the power to grind off arms? Come on, man.

Now my friend…you’ve known me long enough…or at least I would have thought…to know when I’m attempting to address something extremely serious…but using a sense of humor to do it.

3 Likes

My responses are in the same spirit. I’m not really worried about the government grinding people’s arms off in garbage disposals, and I support the harshest possible legal punishments for child molesters.

1 Like

Well, that seem to indicate Ron DeSantis and those promoting snuffing the sexual deviant is the proper path to go.

I’m happy to see you have finally come to the right side!

1 Like

Incorporation is a crap legal theory.

However, A4:S2:C1 is the relevant language that applies to the States honoring the Privileges and Immunities common to the several States that Ratified the Constitution when they Ratified the language.

Amendments 1 to 8 relate to the 9th Amendment as either statements of or elaborations on those rights which were already retained when that language was Ratified.

There were not two bodies of Privileges and Immunities retained among the States that Ratified the Constitution and BoR, these necessarily refer to the same thing.

As Barron’s lawyers should have learned it is important to argue the correct part of the Law rather than try to misapply some of it in place of another part.

1 Like

Or, instead of supporting a government with the power to kill its own citizens, which no real conservative would do, we could lock molesters up for life with no access to children.

1 Like

Well, my good friend, that decision has been rightfully retained by the States and people therein under the Tenth Amendment, which I imagine you give your full support to.

JWK

Is it not a self-evident fact our government educational system has intentionally produced a staggering number of manipulated and brainwashed, useful idiots?