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: carranza2 who wrote (115990)	5/24/2005 5:29:06 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793809

Well, the question makes no sense at all. Prior to incorporation the Bill of Rights didn't apply to the states, period. Do I know any cases that say that? Start with Barron v. Baltimore (1833), which held that the due process clause of the 5th Amendment did not apply to the states, and go on from there. Yes, states do have constitutions. And now that the SCOTUS has incorporated certain "fundamental rights" via the 14th Amendment, they (and the states) have developed a doctrine which holds that the Constitution sets a floor for rights, but not a ceiling. That is to say, a state constitition can give MORE rights than the federal Constitution, but not less. You probably learned that in whatever law school you attended, surely. And thus, there's no reason for me to hunt for cases which tell you something you know. If the question is, "now that certain of the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights have been incorporated, how does that interface with state constitutional rights," there's your answer. If that's not the question, I have no idea what you're asking.