Suing the federal government

[Navy1960]

Beginning with Allgeyer v. Louisiana (1897), the Court interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as providing substantive protection to private contracts and thus prohibiting a range of social and economic regulation, under what was referred to as "freedom of contract".

The Court repudiated the "freedom of contract" line of cases in West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937). In the past forty years it has recognized a number of "fundamental rights" of individuals, such as privacy, which the states can regulate only under narrowly defined circumstances.[19] The Court has also greatly expanded the reach of procedural due process, requiring some sort of hearing before the government may terminate civil service employees, expel a student from public school, or cut off a welfare recipient's benefits.

Any suggestion that Congress has a substantive, non-remedial power under the Fourteenth Amendment is not supported by our case law Boerne v. Flores
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Sec1. 14th Amendment
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[lawbuff]

We have recourse.

Our 5th amendement rights will be violated, under the healthscare scam of a so called bill. When in reality it is a unadulterated take over of our rights as private citizens

Suing Federal Government

We cannot allow this unconstitutional behavior to go on any longer




[SIZE=+1]No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [/SIZE]
I am sure someone will point out that I am wrong.

A constitutional discussion would be good

Bivens is not relevant, and the 5th's takings clause is a basic eminent domain component.