10th amendment healthcare

[washamericom]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

and leave roe v wade the heck alone. not rocket science.

Roe v. Wade: Decision, Summary & Background - HISTORY
www.history.com › topics › womens-rights › roe-v-wade

Mar 27, 2018 - Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. ... Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.

 

[justinacolmena]

Roe v. Wade was a landmark

We'd better call out the survey crew then, because it's property tax time, and the neighbor lady is putting up a she-shed on my property. Sometimes those Israelis are smart enough to bulldoze that shit right down.

effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States.

I really, really hate bench legislation. Nothing in the Constitution of the United States grants lay women or educated men the right to mutilate or murder innocent and unborn infants.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

and leave roe v wade the heck alone. not rocket science.

Roe v. Wade: Decision, Summary & Background - HISTORY
View attachment 322655www.history.com › topics › womens-rights › roe-v-wade
View attachment 322656
Mar 27, 2018 - Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. ... Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.

Roe is 14th Amendment case law.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The hated and stupid 14th amendment.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

and leave roe v wade the heck alone. not rocket science.

Roe v. Wade: Decision, Summary & Background - HISTORY
View attachment 322655www.history.com › topics › womens-rights › roe-v-wade
View attachment 322656
Mar 27, 2018 - Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. ... Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.

The bigger point was that it WAS LEGAL in five states prior to Roe.

If Roe is overturned, it is likely that 30 to 35 states will make it legally.

 

[washamericom]

seems like everything is.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

and leave roe v wade the heck alone. not rocket science.

Roe v. Wade: Decision, Summary & Background - HISTORY
View attachment 322655www.history.com › topics › womens-rights › roe-v-wade
View attachment 322656
Mar 27, 2018 - Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. ... Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.

Roe is 14th Amendment case law.

seems like a lot of 14th
Search Results
Featured snippet from the web

en.wikipedia.org
Wong Kim Ark (1898) is the Supreme Court ruling that determined the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution granted birthright citizenship to all persons born in the United States regardless of race or nationality.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark | Densho Encyclopedia
encyclopedia.densho.org › United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

i'm stunned that the aclu hasn't cried denial of freedom of assembly due to corona.

 

[washamericom]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

and leave roe v wade the heck alone. not rocket science.

Roe v. Wade: Decision, Summary & Background - HISTORY
View attachment 322655www.history.com › topics › womens-rights › roe-v-wade
View attachment 322656
Mar 27, 2018 - Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. ... Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.

The bigger point was that it WAS LEGAL in five states prior to Roe.

If Roe is overturned, it is likely that 30 to 35 states will make it legally.

abortion insurance.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The 14th amendment should be repealed and rewritten.

It gave rise to the stupid idea of incorporation.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

The 14th amendment should be repealed and rewritten.

It gave rise to the stupid idea of incorporation.

So you are for striking the Supremacy clause from the Constitution and striping US citizens of their Bill of Rights protections within a given State if a statute or legal decision of that State conflicts and is given supremacy over the Federal law. That is exactly what would have to happen if the incorporation doctrine were struck and overridden by SCOTUS. We already fought that war back in the 1860's fool, and there is no bloody reason to repeat it!!

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The 14th amendment should be repealed and rewritten.

It gave rise to the stupid idea of incorporation.

So you are for striking the Supremacy clause from the Constitution and striping US citizens of their Bill of Rights protections within a given State if a statute or legal decision of that State conflicts and is given supremacy over the Federal law. That is exactly what would have to happen if the incorporation doctrine were struck and overridden by SCOTUS. We already fought that war back in the 1860's fool, and there is no bloody reason to repeat it!!

1. It is foolish to think it will be refought.

2. Incorporation was never even voted on. It just showed up

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

The 14th amendment should be repealed and rewritten.

It gave rise to the stupid idea of incorporation.

So you are for striking the Supremacy clause from the Constitution and striping US citizens of their Bill of Rights protections within a given State if a statute or legal decision of that State conflicts and is given supremacy over the Federal law. That is exactly what would have to happen if the incorporation doctrine were struck and overridden by SCOTUS. We already fought that war back in the 1860's fool, and there is no bloody reason to repeat it!!

1. It is foolish to think it will be refought.

2. Incorporation was never even voted on. It just showed up

1. It is foolish to think it will be refought.

States Rights were at the heart of the secession movement of the Slave States in the 1850's-1860's, and if you don't see the parallel your being willfully blind or just plain don't comprehend the scope of the topic, the incorporation doctrine, YOU raised!

2. Incorporation was never even voted on. It just showed up

To learn a bit about the history of protecting the civil rights of people from the over reach of State governments and the tyranny of majority rule as it would apply to individual rights, look to the SCOTUS decisions from the Slaughter-House cases of the 1870's forward regarding the incorporation doctrine. Or don't and remain ignorant of how YOUR RIGHTS are protected from want-to-be tyrannical State Governors and Legislators!

 

[MadChemist]

The 14th amendment should be repealed and rewritten.

It gave rise to the stupid idea of incorporation.

So you are for striking the Supremacy clause from the Constitution and striping US citizens of their Bill of Rights protections within a given State if a statute or legal decision of that State conflicts and is given supremacy over the Federal law. That is exactly what would have to happen if the incorporation doctrine were struck and overridden by SCOTUS. We already fought that war back in the 1860's fool, and there is no bloody reason to repeat it!!

1. It is foolish to think it will be refought.

2. Incorporation was never even voted on. It just showed up

1. It is foolish to think it will be refought.

States Rights were at the heart of the secession movement of the Slave States in the 1850's-1860's, and if you don't see the parallel your being willfully blind or just plain don't comprehend the scope of the topic, the incorporation doctrine, YOU raised!

2. Incorporation was never even voted on. It just showed up

To learn a bit about the history of protecting the civil rights of people from the over reach of State governments and the tyranny of majority rule as it would apply to individual rights, look to the SCOTUS decisions from the Slaughter-House cases of the 1870's forward regarding the incorporation doctrine. Or don't and remain ignorant of how YOUR RIGHTS are protected from want-to-be tyrannical State Governors and Legislators!

States rights or states powers are identified in the 10th amendment. They are all powers not granted to the Federal Government or prohibited to the sates. Which is a bunch.

That fact that people tried to defy the constitutional limits of the states by advocating for secession does not change that they exist.

 

[justinacolmena]

Roe is 14th Amendment case law.

No. Roe is fish eggs. Milt is fish sperm. You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not mentally ill or a deadbeat dad in order to get a fishing license, and that you don't owe any past child support or alimony.

 

[MadChemist]

The 14th amendment should be repealed and rewritten.

It gave rise to the stupid idea of incorporation.

So you are for striking the Supremacy clause from the Constitution and striping US citizens of their Bill of Rights protections within a given State if a statute or legal decision of that State conflicts and is given supremacy over the Federal law. That is exactly what would have to happen if the incorporation doctrine were struck and overridden by SCOTUS. We already fought that war back in the 1860's fool, and there is no bloody reason to repeat it!!

I indicated it should be rewritten.

However, the idea of selective incorporation would be specifically prohibited.

That would be an expansion of powers through judicial fiat (which it was to start).

Incorporation did not show up until the early 30's. The war was fought over something else.