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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (42869)	4/22/2010 4:26:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Again, please quote from the constitution where it says what you say it says. Posting a link to the whole constitution is useless. I know of multiple places where it is online, and could fine many more pretty quickly with a search engine. More to the point posting such a link does not say anything about the constitution. The wiki link about Federal Preemption is also useless. I'm well aware of the idea of federal preemption. Pointing out that doctrine doesn't even show that it applies in this case (because the power could be that of the state), but assuming it does you would need an actual federal law to preempt the state law. In the absence of a specific federal law that preempts the state law, the doctrine of preemption would not itself do so. And once again the states do set election and ballot conditions for every election. That's happening in the real world, every year.