Right to Privacy, the US Constitution and Ideological Consistency

[Dante]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

 

[whitehall]

The Supremes can expand on existing rights as far as their imagination and their political affiliation permits but there is no Constitutional right if the "right" is not expressed in the Constitution.

 

[Dante]

The Supremes can expand on existing rights as far as their imagination and their political affiliation permits but there is no Constitutional right if the "right" is not expressed in the Constitution.

You believe the court can expand on rights that exist and rights enumerated?

What if a non existing right comes out of an existing right as an expansion of that existing right and what if that existing right is in the constitution?

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

It is implicit in the 4th and 9th Amendments.

 

[Dante]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

It is implicit in the 4th and 9th Amendments.

implied though not plainly expressed?

"The right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures"

"enumeration in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others"

So a right to be secure is not absolute. What is privacy? Why didn't it get listed? We know the most important rights that they framers thought at risk by government were listed

The USC recognizes rights not enumerated, but what are those rights?

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 

[HenryBHough]

Problem with IV is that today's Marx-o-Crat party hadn't been invented so nobody would foresee the flexibility of that word "unreasonable".

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

It is implicit in the 4th and 9th Amendments.

implied though not plainly expressed?

"The right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures"

"enumeration in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others"

So a right to be secure is not absolute. What is privacy? Why didn't it get listed? We know the most important rights that they framers thought at risk by government were listed

The USC recognizes rights not enumerated, but what are those rights?

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Constitution itself only enumerates the powers of the federal government.

The BoR is and addendum of "Thou Shalt Nots" for the feds.

How you believe that every conceivable right of the people to not be hassled by the government, that was set forth to serve them and protect the inherent right of free peaceful people to be left alone, escapes my grasp.

 

[Dante]

Problem with IV is that today's Marx-o-Crat party hadn't been invented so nobody would foresee the flexibility of that word "unreasonable".

moron that you so consistently be and wish others were...we all know since after Washington left office and even during his term, there were cases where Americans accused the government of unreasonable searches.

jesus, you should hang out on yahoo or something

 

[Dante]

It is implicit in the 4th and 9th Amendments.

implied though not plainly expressed?

"The right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures"

"enumeration in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others"

So a right to be secure is not absolute. What is privacy? Why didn't it get listed? We know the most important rights that they framers thought at risk by government were listed

The USC recognizes rights not enumerated, but what are those rights?

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Constitution itself only enumerates the powers of the federal government.

The BoR is and addendum of "Thou Shalt Nots" for the feds.

How you believe that every conceivable right of the people to not be hassled by the government, that was set forth to serve them and protect the inherent right of free peaceful people to be left alone, escapes my grasp.

your being a complete imbecile in this post is disheartening. You have no idea what Dante believes about rights listed or not, inherent or invented.


There is a preamble:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

I believe the preamble suggests the document does more than enumerate the powers of the federal government. It sets forth ideals, principles, and more.

The Bill of Rights were the price of ratification.

To be left alone? Yep, within bounds. No absolute right to be free and left alone. See "unreasonable searches and seizures"

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Oh, I thought you were interested in a conversation and exchange of ideas.

It's now clear that you only wish to belittle and demean people.

My bad.

Unsubscribe.

Have a nice day

 

[Dante]

with a profile like this: [MENTION=46151]HelenaHandbag[/MENTION] HelenaHandbag is online now
I shoot back

you shoot and you're thin-skinned? wow!
okie dokie


"How you believe that every conceivable right of the people to not be hassled by the government, that was set forth to serve them and protect the inherent right of free peaceful people to be left alone, escapes my grasp." - someone interested in a conversation and exchange of ideas, who doesn't wish to belittle and demean people.

 

[whitehall]

The Supremes can expand on existing rights as far as their imagination and their political affiliation permits but there is no Constitutional right if the "right" is not expressed in the Constitution.

You believe the court can expand on rights that exist and rights enumerated?

What if a non existing right comes out of an existing right as an expansion of that existing right and what if that existing right is in the constitution?

There is no legal control over the nine legal geniuses in black. I doubt is the FF considered the power they gave to lifetime appointees who are supposed to uphold the rigid constraints of the Constitution rather than legislate freedoms that did not exist and take away freedoms that do exist.

 

[Publius1787]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

It's a good question. I have yet to hear the courts rule on rights not in the US constitution.

This amendment goes regularly ignored by the Supreme Court. I'm afraid it doesn't answer your question though.

Amendment X

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.

 

[Dante]

The Supremes can expand on existing rights as far as their imagination and their political affiliation permits but there is no Constitutional right if the "right" is not expressed in the Constitution.

You believe the court can expand on rights that exist and rights enumerated?

What if a non existing right comes out of an existing right as an expansion of that existing right and what if that existing right is in the constitution?

There is no legal control over the nine legal geniuses in black. I doubt is the FF considered the power they gave to lifetime appointees who are supposed to uphold the rigid constraints of the Constitution rather than legislate freedoms that did not exist and take away freedoms that do exist.

you have to deal with the real world and put your kneejerk, reactionary impulses to bloviate and demagogue things, if you want an honest and open discussion based on reason and rationality

 

[Dante]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

It's a good question. (1) I have yet to hear the courts rule on rights not in the US constitution.

(2) This amendment goes regularly ignored by the Supreme Court. I'm afraid it doesn't answer your question though.

Amendment X

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.

(1) rights not enumerated?

(2) regularly? it has been addressed, no?

 

[Dante]

HelenaHandbag HelenaHandbag

with a profile like this: [MENTION=46151]HelenaHandbag[/MENTION] HelenaHandbag is online now
I shoot back

you shoot and you're thin-skinned? wow!
okie dokie


"How you believe that every conceivable right of the people to not be hassled by the government, that was set forth to serve them and protect the inherent right of free peaceful people to be left alone, escapes my grasp." - someone interested in a conversation and exchange of ideas, who doesn't wish to belittle and demean people.

don't understand

 

[Tuckwolf]

The Supremes can expand on existing rights as far as their imagination and their political affiliation permits but there is no Constitutional right if the "right" is not expressed in the Constitution.

The right is expressed. Jeez, don't you people read?

 

[Dante]

The Supremes can expand on existing rights as far as their imagination and their political affiliation permits but there is no Constitutional right if the "right" is not expressed in the Constitution.

The right is expressed. Jeez, don't you people read?

Yet not all Justices have agreed with this position. Interesting, no?

 

[Disir]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

Yep. It doesn't say privacy but it is implied:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,

(My favorite) The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

So far as I know it goes well with my other stances.

 

[Dante]

Is there a Constitutional right to privacy even if it is not enumerated in the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and if so, why -- and if not, why?

How does your answer coexist with other stands you take on rights and the Constitution?

Yep. It doesn't say privacy but it is implied:

I may agree with implied powers, but I was asking about enumerated rights. Do people who in debates, who take a strict constructionist stand on what is in the Constitution about abortion and same sex marriage, take a strict constructionist stand on the right to privacy

If there is NO right to an abortion or a right to marry enumerated in the US Constitution, will people admit there is no right to privacy enumerated in it?