Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (115953)	5/24/2005 3:24:15 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793801

The Bill of Rights did not apply to the states, it applied to the federal government. It may not have in the beginning but for all practical purposes it does now. I should not have to throw a lot of irrelevant historical background and caveats into every post to avoid smarmy remedial instruction (no offense) on the 14th amendment.

To: Ilaine who wrote (115953)	5/24/2005 3:53:13 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793801

But the history of the Constitution is clear. It was NOT intended to restrain states vis-a-vis their own citizens. It was intended to be a pact between the states. The Bill of Rights did not apply to the states, it applied to the federal government. That's why it says things like "Congress shall make no law." By your logic, the States before the 14th Amendment could have with impunity imposed religious restrictions on their citizens, never mind that one of the reasons our country was established was to allow the free exercise of religion. Do you know of any cases in which State restrictions on rights granted by the Bill of Rights were upheld by any court on the ground you cited, i.e., that the BOR did not apply to the States?