As I pointed out within a year of Hines SCOTUS issued a decision in which Hines was placed in context and demonstrated that the principles of which I speak are not new.
I am not going to judge what his ancestors new or didn't know. I am pretty confident my late grand-uncle (who fought in World War II that I had plenty of discussions with) that while he may not have known of the exact source in the Constitution or case-law supporting it he knew of the principle of dual-sovereignty and federalism and the role it played in the balance of powers. Just as my late father and late father-in-law when they fought in the Korean war, or my uncles when they fought in Vietnam and the same went for me when I enlisted 2 days after my 18th birthday in 1984.
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
And as I pointed out, there was plenty of statutory law, consistent with Hines, which asserted Federal supremacy in issues of immigration, during, and for years after, World War Two.
This immigration debate arises from an evolutionary process, affected to a large extent by judicial activism. That activism, to some, interrupts and contradicts, what many, especially those of us getting on in years, regard as traditional Constitutional values.
That is why, in order to appreciate generational perspectives, it is important to look at this issue through the prism of culture and historic context, not exclusively through the myopic eye of sterile, most recent, and/or, sometimes seemingly contradictory, Federal Circuit, or Supreme Court rulings, which can always be overturned.
Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 20th, 2017 at 04:17 PM.
No son, you are saying that, not I. Do you know the meaning of the word "contemporary?"
But, now to you: Are you saying that the liberals, TO THIS DAY, have no understanding of federalism when it applies to abortion? Silly Mr. Warren.
At any rate, this pissing contest is taxing my kidneys, and my wife is concerned with all of the attendant attention I am giving to my "special purpose."
Thank you for the exchange.
Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 20th, 2017 at 06:08 PM.
Doesn't the following demonstrate the people of that time understood these principles:
Article entitled "ASKS STATE CONTROL OF PROHIBITION" http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
Article entitled "Barkley's Error" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
Article entitled "PERIL TO FEDERAL SANTA" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
Last edited by dtwarren; September 20th, 2017 at 06:07 PM.
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Here is an interesting one entitled "Federal Courts Prohibited From Enjoining Relitigation" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Hillary Clinton, a "Paulette Revere" regarding Russia?
Seriously?
The uranium deal, the "Reset," and all of the crap with Ukraine, under her and/or Obama's watch.
Don't forget the rather cozy relationship with the Clinton Foundation.
The only area that Hillary can credibly speak to regarding Paul Revere's midnight cry "The British are coming," is the word "coming." After being with Bill all those years, she must be an expert, from all perspectives, on that subject.
And the left bitches that the "Deplorables" continue to call her out.
Just sayin'.
http://deadline.com/2017/09/hillary-...er-1202173539/
Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 20th, 2017 at 07:34 PM.
Her campaign manager, Podesta, had connections to the Russians that made any by Trump pale by comparison. He sat on numerous boards of directors of Russian controlled corporations and made a fortune from it. His brother is a exceedingly well paid lobbyist for Russian interests. You'll never hear told by Lester Dolt or any of the rest.
There are currently 33 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 33 guests)