NBC Cherry-Picks the Constitution, Accidentally Finds the Tenth Amendment

US Constitution gun pistol revolver

Bigstock

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.

In response to President Trump asserting that he has the authority to end the COVID-19 lockdown nationwide, NBC’s Dartunorro Clark has decided that pesky Tenth Amendment actually means something; that he can’t usurp state powers.

The president also appeared to state incorrectly that he, rather than governors and local officials, had the authority to order states and cities to end public health measures that have closed businesses and curtailed other activity.

In fact, under the Constitution, powers not specifically given to the federal government, including police power, are reserved for the states.

Nor is Mr. Clark a lone voice in the media wilderness. Two more NBC reporters echoed that sentiment.

But experts — and the Constitution — say Trump is wrong. The authority to require businesses to close in a public health crisis is what is a known as a “police power,” and it is reserved by the Constitution to the states, not to the federal government.

It seems odd that none of these folks are taking note of the “commerce” clause, usually so beloved of the Left. It’s been used to rationalize federal control of everything from a farmers growing crops for personal use, to protection of government-bred wolf/coyote hybrids, to carrying a gun in a school zone.

One might think that national commerce fell within the limits of the clause. Or the “general welfare” clause, which has been used to justify…well, everything.

But if Trump Derangement Syndrome has caused them to finally notice the Tenth Amendment, that’s something worthwhile.

Now, if only they’d spot this one, which not only doesn’t grant the government any power, but limits it:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

comments

  1. avatar American Patriot says:

    Good luck with that one!!!
    As it is I’m betting a conservative told them about the 10th Amend.

  2. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    The commerce clause was also invoked for the partial birth abortion ban act.

    1. avatar JasonM says:

      It’s also a power of Congress not the President. The President has neither the authority to order us to stay home and close businesses nor to lift those orders. He does have the right to make recommendations, as do we all.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Actually, he has the authority to PREVENT interference in interstate commerce via violations of civil rights under color of law. So, yes, Trump has absolute authority to order the lockdowns lifted with the repercussions for non-compliance being federal civil rights charges.

  3. avatar Debbie W. says:

    In my home NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS News gets zapped with a remote.

    1. avatar WI Patriot says:

      Of the 4 you mentioned, pbs is the worst, and they continue to beg for $$$…

      1. avatar Charles Cox says:

        I wouldn’t give them a wooden nickle.

        1. avatar WI Patriot says:

          But so many do…

      2. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

        Our PBS channel gets
        1. Taxpayer money,
        2. “Subscriber” donations,
        3. Ads (Toyota, European cruise lines, Ralph Lauren, insurance co.)
        That last one should exempt them from all taxpayer money. Most of their shows are BBC, not original. People around here brag about how they “support” publicTV” by subscribing.

    2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      NBC, CBS, ABC

      NBC – National Broadcast Communists

      CBS – Communist Broadcast System

      ABC – American Broadcast Communists

      Not worth watching.

      1. avatar Joe nobody says:

        Don’t forget about PBS –

        Pure
        Bravo
        Sierra

  4. avatar WI Patriot says:

    Gotta love how liberals pick and choose which Constitutional amendments they’ll recognize…

    1. avatar Charles Cox says:

      And when they will recognize them. Bet if it was a democrat president the 10th amendment wouldn’t exist anymore.

        1. avatar Special Ed says:

          It’s just that our “rights” have a lot more competition nowadays. Since we’ve added the right to health care, abortion, a living wage, housing, phones, cars, cable tv, etc.

    2. avatar Dude says:

      It’s similar to how libs will cite a Bible verse to prove a point, yet they don’t follow the Bible at all. In the past few years, they’ve used it as an argument for illegal immigration.

  5. avatar Manse Jolly says:

    IMO, not that I agree with it, but once the President declared a National Emergency, even if States did too, then all kinds of specific laws kicked in under the Patriot Act, all the Continuity of Government laws, and even laws no one is has heard of.

    I think the 10 Amendment, for all practical purposes, has been dead for quite some time. Decades or more, perhaps, as some say, all the way back to the 14th. Reconstruction Amendments seem to suggest that.

    1. avatar Hydguy says:

      The 10th was killed by Lincoln.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Common sense should be in there somewhere. A few years back, 13 states got together and literally CREATED the federal government. It should be quite clear who has the greater authority.

  6. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “I think the 10 Amendment, for all practical purposes, has been dead for quite some time”

    Careful, liberals can say the same of the 2nd…

    1. avatar Semperfit says:

      The Constitution will never be dead. It will just be violated constantly, just like stop signs.

  7. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

    Yup. Same as how for years and years, if you argued for states rights (appropriately called states powers as governments don’t have rights), you were called a racist/sexist/homophone/someone who would have argued for slavery back during the 1800s, etc…but then Trump gets elected, and all-of-a-sudden, the Left are all about states rights. A court in California in stopping one of Trump’s actions (I think regarding cutting money to sanctuary cities, but I forget), stated (paraphrasing) that the President needs to realize that the states are semi-autonomous from the federal government.

  8. avatar Ron says:

    Until the Democrats are back in power again. Then it’ll be “the constitution is outdated”, and “it was written like 200 years ago” ect…

  9. avatar Miner49er says:

    “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.“

    Now there is a good example of the style of language used by the framers of the constitution, take a look at the structure:

    The first line is the qualifying preface, delineating what is to be discussed in the body of the amendment:

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, “

    Everything that follows that line will be directly related to the subject expressed in the qualifying preface, in this case ”the powers not delegated to the United States”.

    We can see the same structure in the second amendment:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.“

    Here, the qualifying preface is:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, “ meaning everything that follows is in regard to the subject, “A well regulated Militia,“.

    So clearly, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is subject to regulation as expressed in the qualifying preface.

    Now, we can discuss the nature and depth of that regulation but the constitution is clear, there is a requirement for regulation of the people’s right to keep and bear arms.

    Well, I’m glad we’ve got that all cleared up.

    1. avatar Ron says:

      The mental gymnastics you leftards go through to demonize the constitution never cease to amaze.

    2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      “So clearly, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is subject to regulation as expressed in the qualifying preface…”

      When quoting the 2A, you forgot the words “shall not be infringed.” The fringe of a matter is the outer edge. The Founders did not write the 2A to mean nobody can play at the fringes but please stay away from the center of that natural right…they very clearly instructed Government to not even approach the edges (where gun control begins).

      Talk about cherry picking. Geez. You weren’t even subtle about it.

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      If you had read D.C. v. Heller, you would know that “well regulated” means, in the language of the day, well trained. In other words, in order to have a well trained militia, the People in their individual and sovereign capacity have an immutable right (even a duty) to own firearms so as to be proficient in their use.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Mark N.,

        I would expand upon your description that “well regulated” means, “in excellent working condition.”

        Applying that simple meaning, we can accurately paraphrase the Second Amendment as follows:

        An effective Militia in excellent working condition is necessary for a free State. Therefore, no government entity may infringe upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms — because the people cannot form an effective Militia in excellent working condition if government has the power to interfere with the people’s ability to keep and bear arms.

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          Let us examine an actual dictionary from the time period we’re discussing in order to ascertain the meaning of the word in the minds of the framers.

          Fortunately for us, Webster’s dictionary of 1828 is available online.

          “In 1806, Noah Webster published his first dictionary, A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language . Then in 1807 he began working on an even more comprehensive edition, and in 1828 this was publihed as An American Dictionary of the English Language.”

          “REG’ULATED, participle passive Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subjected to rules or restrictions.”

          Yes, the first definition specifically uses the word rule, further specifying “subjected to rules or restrictions”.

          And there’s no language in the definition about “well trained” or “excellent working condition” as some assert without evidence.

          Thank you Noah Webster, for providing us the exact definition of the time!

        2. avatar Ron says:

          Yes miner, I’m sure you, some random liberal internet troll, knows far more about constitutional law then the Supreme Court of the United States.

        3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Miner49er,

          Okay, I’ll play. Let’s apply the 1828 Noah Webster Dictionary definition of “regulated”. And being the good students that we are, we will apply the 1828 definition IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ACTUAL SENTENCE AND DOCUMENT WHERE THE FRAMERS PUT IT.

          “REG’ULATED … Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subjected to rules or restrictions.”

          The context of the Framers and the United States Constitution (which includes the Amendments) was to establish a government whose sole purpose was to secure our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is not up for debate. It is in the United States Declaration of Independence. Furthermore, the context of the Framers, the United States Declaration of Independence, and the United States Constitution was to severely LIMIT and CONSTRAIN government. Again, this is not up for debate. Finally, the explicit context of the Amendments themselves in the United States Constitution was to reinforce broad LIMITS and CONSTRAINTS on government.

          Now, let’s talk about the context specifically of the Second Amendment. The Framers wrote that amendment to ensure our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — to ensure that we remain a free state, free from tyranny from any entity. By their very nature, tyrants never willingly give up their stranglehold. Tyrants only release their stranglehold when someone forces them to release their grip. And the only way that someone can force a tyrant to release their grip is through force of arms (whether by threat of force of arms or actual application of force of arms).

          Now, which part of Noah Webster’s definition applies to the Second Amendment given the context of the Framers, the United States Declaration of Independence, and the United States Constitutions?

          Is it:
          (1) Adjusted by rule, method or forms
          (2) put in good order
          (3) subjected to rules or restrictions

          Remember, the context is a Militia able to secure a free state from both individual and government tyranny. Thus, a Militia which is “subjected to [government] rules or restrictions” is unable to prevent government tyranny and that part of the definition cannot apply. Therefore, the only part of Webster’s definition which makes any sense IN CONTEXT is that “regulated” means “put in good order” which is another way of saying effective. A Militia without excellent firearms is most certainly NOT “in good order”. Rather, a Militia needs unfettered access to excellent firearms to be “in good order”. And a simple, less awkward way to express the idea is that we need an effective Militia to ensure a free state.

          Bringing it all together, once again accurately paraphrased IN CONTEXT:

          An effective Militia is necessary for the security of a free state. And an effective Militia must have free and unfettered ability to keep and bear effective arms. Therefore, government shall not infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. For, if government is able to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, the people cannot form an effective Militia and therefore cannot ensure a free state.

          Set. Game. Match.

        4. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          @uncommon,

          I have a copy of Webster’s original 1828 dictionary as well.

          I agree with your response to Miner.

        5. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

          “I would expand upon your description that “well regulated” means, “in excellent working condition.””

          Another – “A gang that can shoot straight”…

        6. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

          Miner, go to Google Books and search the phrase “well regulated.” You’ll find all sorts of references to it in books from the 1700s and 1800s that Google has scanned referring to having a well regulated life, well regulated horses, well regulated education, well regulated household, well regulated drawing room, well regulated hairstyle, etc…Chatles Montisquieu talked about a well regulated society and one of the writings of the time also mentioned a well regulated government. It has nothing to do with government regulation aa we know it today.

        7. avatar pwrserge says:

          Looks like local CCP collaborator Miner is still having problems with the English language…

          Let me spell this out for you.

          “regulation”, regardless of meaning, is a property of the MILITIA.
          “the right to keep and bear arms” belongs to the PEOPLE, not the MILITIA

          Now go collect your bag of moldy rice and bowl of kung-pow bat from your CCP overlords.

    4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Miner49er,

      The prefatory clause of the Second Amendment declares a purpose for the right to keep and bear arms. The prefatory clause of the Second Amendment does NOT limit the right. Nor does the prefatory clause state the only possible purpose of the right.

      1. avatar Semperfit says:

        True. A limited right is not a right but an allowance. The Bill of Rights is not the Bill of Allowances.

    5. avatar James Campbell says:

      ““A well regulated Militia,“.

      So clearly, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is subject to regulation as expressed in the qualifying preface….”

      Wrong again 49er.
      The term “well regulated” had a VERY different meaning when the Founding Fathers wrote these documents.
      The term means in good working order, with sufficient PERIOD CORRECT materials to achieve the desired function.
      Every wonder why very old ACCURATE clocks had the word “Regulated” on their face? It was NOT because a beurocrat was hidden behind it turning a knob connected to the hands.
      Glad to clear that up for you.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Let us examine an actual dictionary from the time period we’re discussing in order to ascertain the meaning of the word in the minds of the framers.

        We do want to be “Period Correct”, as you put it.

        Fortunately for us, Webster’s dictionary of 1828 is available online.

        “In 1806, Noah Webster published his first dictionary, A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language . Then in 1807 he began working on an even more comprehensive edition, and in 1828 this was publihed as An American Dictionary of the English Language.”

        “REG’ULATED, participle passive Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subjected to rules or restrictions.”

        Yes, the first definition specifically uses the word rule, further specifying “subjected to rules or restrictions”.

        And there’s no language in the definition about “well trained” or “excellent working condition” as some assert without evidence.

        Thank you Noah Webster, for providing us the exact definition of the time!

        1. avatar Hydguy says:

          1828 huh? Let me look at something.. the BoR was ratified in 1791, 29 years before Webster made his first dictionary.
          Not the ‘same period’.

        2. avatar ‘liljoe says:

          I’m not sure what your argument is. Even if we’ll regulated means controlled by law. They are stating, in order for a militia to be controlled so that this country can remain free, the rights of the people (not the militia) to bear arms should not be restricted.

          In other words, in order that a militia doesn’t take over, everyone can carry unrestricted arms.

          So that we the people can control any militia.

          Which really argues against the NFA and against all other gun laws.

    6. avatar HEGEMON says:

      Once you put down the crack pipe, just how much regulation do you want? Be clear and concise, as best you can through your cocaine HCL stupor.

    7. avatar Semperfit says:

      No, silly boy. There would be no need of the second amendment if a governmental body was in charge of the troops. It says the right of the people, not the state. The state has no rights–just priveledges and duties bestowed by the people. You people use obfuscation in pushing abortion, too. That reminds me of how the Devil gets his plans implemented.

    8. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      Federal Governments enumerated power anything out side of these listed are extra Constitutional aka un Constitutional.

      18 Enumerated Powers of the Federal Government

      The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
      To borrow on the credit of the United States;
      To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
      To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
      To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
      To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
      To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
      To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
      To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
      To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
      To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
      To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
      To provide and maintain a Navy;
      To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
      To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
      18 Enumerated Powers of Federal Government
      To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
      To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
      To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

      http://www.libertyzone.org/18-Enumerated-Powers.pdf

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,”

        Yes, there it is.

      2. avatar Miner49er says:

        From Webster’s dictionary of 1828:

        “ COMMERCE, noun

        1. In a general sense, an interchange or mutual change of goods, wares, productions, or property of any kind, between nations or individuals, either by barter, or by purchase and sale; trade; traffick. commerce is foreign or inland. Foreign commerce is the trade which one nation carries on with another; inland commerce or inland trade, is the trade in the exchange of commodities between citizens of the same nation or state. Active commerce

        2. Intercourse between individuals; interchange of work, business, civilities or amusements; mutual dealings in common life.

        3. Familiar intercourse between the sexes.

        4. Interchange; reciprocal communications; as, there is a vast commerce of ideas.

        COMMERCE, verb intransitive

        1. To traffick; to carry on trade.

        2. To hold intercourse with.

        And looks commercing with the skies.”

        1. avatar Ron says:

          Imagine if we were to say, twist and pervert the words and meaning of the 13th amendment over hundreds of years until we could argue that it was actually an amendment that permitted the right to own slaves.

    9. avatar MADDMAXX says:

      Now, we can discuss the nature and depth of that regulation but the constitution is clear, there is a requirement for regulation of the people’s right to keep and bear arms.

      Using YOUR argument one could surmise that “REGULATED” refers to proper training in the use of firearms in a militaristic setting and that ALL citizens bear the right to gun ownership and access to that training…

    10. avatar strych9 says:

      ‘“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, “ meaning everything that follows is in regard to the subject, “A well regulated Militia,“.

      Um, no because those words don’t mean what you suggest that they do. “Well regulated” is an adjective that means “working properly” or “functioning as expected” or similar. We know this because the phrase was in use long before the Constitution was written (and after) and was used to refer to objects that were working as expected, such as clocks. A “well regulated timepiece” is not “subject to regulation”, it’s holding the correct time.

      So, let’s insert the actual meaning and not what you’d like it to be, and then parse a similar phrase.

      “A properly functioning Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…”

      So clearly, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is subject to regulation proper functionality as expressed in the qualifying preface.

      Ergo, it’s not a “qualifying preface” but rather it’s an independent clause wherein “well regulated militia” is a direct object that is being acted on and the indirect objects “free state” and “the people” later in the sentence are the beneficiaries of the action of the verbs “keep” and “bear” in relation to the noun “arms” which is producing another noun “right”, which in turn is that thing that confers the benefit/acts on the militia. Since “well regulated militia” is a direct object, being acted on by the verbs, the word “regulated” cannot be a verb itself, hence there is no “regulation” to be done because a single instance of the word can’t mean two things or hold two positions in the sentence at the same time, it’s part of the direct object and a an adjective modifying the militia.

      So, the proper understanding of this is that the people have the right (noun) to keep (verb) and bear(verb) arms (noun) so that they may form a “well regulated militia” (noun/direct object) for the purposes of “maintaining the security of a free state” (verb/noun/indirect object/object of a subordinate clause).

      Further, there’s no way that the state could have this right because that would render the entire sentence redundant and meaningless and the entire structure of the sentence would have to change so that “state” would cease to be a indirect object (which is what allows it to get a benefit from the verbs in this sentence).

      You can see this this has been toyed with before in terms of subjects and objects without getting into the actual definition of phrases. One of the common examples is:

      “A healthy breakfast, being necessary to the start of a good day, the right of the people to keep and eat food, shall not be infringed.”

      Now, does the right to keep and eat food refer to the rights of the healthy breakfast, or to the people who are eating it? Clearly it doesn’t refer to the healthy breakfast because the healthy breakfast is a direct object within an independent clause that acts on the indirect object “the people” via their right to keep an object.

      There’s no possible way that what you’ve said is correct.

      1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

        And why would the other 9 amendments clearly limit government power, but #2 limit ‘the people’?

        Talking to him is like conversing with a stone wall. Ah, well. Perhaps in 8 weeks or so he’ll have larger problems to deal with… 😉

    11. avatar Bill says:

      You are overlooking one thing. In the parlance of the era that the Bill of Rights was written the word regulated meant well equipped or in working order. This has been discussed ad nauseam by legal Scholars and historians. It’s been so thoroughly researched and explained that it can hardly even be argued with.

    12. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “A well regulated militia” is NOT the subject of the sentence, which makes your argument juvenile. The subject of the sentence is “the right of the people”. Pretty sure that was freaking middle school.

  10. avatar I Haz A Question says:

    Those three documents shown in the photo at top? I have all of them (plus others) on the same parchment material, framed and on my wall next to me as I write this. 🙂

  11. avatar Scooter says:

    Wow, much smart, very research.
    Too bad not just anyone can look at this… “konsteetooshun” thingy. Bet there’s all kinds of gems buried in there that the academic elite may some day tell us lowly folks. If only the average person had SOME way to know these rights they have! It would be cool if they were ALL spelled out and like numbered or something.

  12. avatar Hannibal says:

    Wouldn’t it be “interesting” (may you live in interesting times) if Trump, the darling of those who are always in favor of state’s rights, were to foment a rebellion by states by trying to use federal force on them to “open back up”?

    Some of those same states would, ironically, be those most pushing for federal action on things like gun control. Hypocrisy is a bi-partisan issue.

    I suspect things might continue as they have been, with Trump making ridiculous statements in his daily reality show and then having them walked back or ignored. But if not, his presidency might be known for more than just an inept response to a pandemic and the creation of a zombie stock market.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Even then, compared to sloJoe, slithering around in the darkness of his basement while occasionally reading a teleprompter, I know who I will be voting for.

  13. avatar Mark N. says:

    A r ece3nt court decision cited the Tenth Amendment in support of a conclusion that the US Government lacks police power, and therefore could not order that all bump stocks be confiscated/turned in/destroyed without compensation. Maybe that gave them the idea. We all know that they have been looking for ways to undermine Trump in the middle of a national emergency by any means available. Just look at how they tried to slip their gun control wet dreams into the stimulus law.

  14. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    If Leftards only had a Effin clue but it’s more comfortable to go thru life”,fat,dumb and stupid.” and I might add uneducated.

    Which reminds me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIYM-I4sJKU

  15. avatar Wayne says:

    NBC? That is that? I have a TV that hasn’t been turned on in over 3 years. I watch on Youtube Fox streams and other things. Tired of paying for nothing worth watching and the 24/7 liberal bull crap. Cable money saved for better things. LOL

  16. avatar Ing says:

    The only reason they’re talking about the Tenth Amendment now is because it’s an excuse to argue for MORE government power. If it means “progressive” states can stomp on their citizens longer and harder, you bet they’re all about states’ rights and the Tenth.

    You sure as hell won’t hear them defending it if it results in more freedom.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      And we are now finding it’s the states (democrat lead) that want more power. As many people have said already. This civil rights battle is going down to the state level.

      Whatever 2A state group or groups you have is really now the fighter in your state legislature. Same for your city and county. It’s now time for everyone to show up at any and all government meetings.

      1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        And we are now finding it’s the states (democrat lead) that want more power. As many people have said already. This civil rights battle is going down to the state level.

        They only want the power until they don’t, Look to the anti-Trump Governors/Mayors who found themselves in over their heads and immediately started begging the hated POTUS for help, demanding to be put at the top of the list for everything (are New Yorkers more important than people in Cincinnati?)… Why are the most heavily affected areas (with the strictest regulations) in states under liberal control while states like Fl. and Tx. are quietly going about the business of getting things back to normal as quickly as possible with minimal Federal involvement?…

      2. avatar UpInArms says:

        ” we are now finding it’s the states (democrat lead) that want more power ”

        And Don Corleone… ahem, excuse me, Andrew Cuomo… is leading the charge.

        https://theintercept.com/2020/04/03/andrew-cuomo-coronavirus-bail-criminal-justice/

  17. avatar Texican says:

    As they say, “If democrats/liberals/socialists/communists didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have standards at all!”

  18. avatar That Jason says:

    The point of Trump saying that was to get governors to own the situation in their individual states; Cuomo in particular. They ran so fast to proclaim their total control that they never thought about what that said for their OrangeManBad chant.

    1. avatar WI Patriot says:

      There’s always been a method to his madness…🤔

  19. avatar enuf says:

    The “LefTards” are correct, no President has the authority under the Constitution to do what Trump said he has total power to do. Which was to command the States, via their Governors, to maintain or lift the many orders and restrictions the they had placed on their citizens, within their States.

    Good arguments can be made that the Governors lacked such authority themselves, in many cases. Not the point here tho.

    Yes, in matters of interstate commerce, things are different. Loads of Federal authority to be found there. That’s not the issue here.

    So if my State Governor wants to keep restaurants and schools and movie theaters closed, but gun shops and golf courses open, no President can tell him different.

    On the other hand, to clarify for anyone still confused as to the meaning and the intent of the Second Amendment, the American People have the natural born right to own and carry arms of common and current utility to a modern, standing army.

    That’s it. Oh, it does not include felons. If a person cannot act like a civilized human animal within some boundaries of non-criminality, then to hell with you.

    It would be nice if those people would get some training, routinely practice in small groups at least.

    But hey, I’ll take what I can get.

    1. avatar Hydguy says:

      Former felons who have actually rehabilitate themselves are most certainly allowed to have firearms.
      ‘No Free man shall be debarred the use of arms’-Thomas Jefferson.
      The problem is the criminal justice system and it’s revolving door of hardened criminals who it keeps letting out.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        The final draft of the complete quote is enlightning, it does not seem to condone concealed carry or open carry anywhere but on the ‘free man’s property:

        “Third Draft: “No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands or tenements]”3

        This sentence does not appear in the Virginia Constitution as adopted.”

        That certainly doesn’t fit the narrative.

        1. avatar Hydguy says:

          A draft, that wasn’t adopted as written.
          Oh the utter horror that it was reduced and stands on its own as is.

          But I’m sure you would love it if the Founding Fathers capitulated and never included the 2A

      2. avatar enuf says:

        True, but that return to normalcy should follow a process. It should not be automatic upon leaving prison. A felon should have to prove to some authority, with a decision by a judge to restore full rights.

        I know it is not that way everywhere, but it should be.

    2. avatar Dude says:

      I think we’ll be looking back on this and realizing that the severity of the shut down was a mistake. What Trump said was poorly worded. He should have said we will soon be releasing guidelines for a phased reopening. It’s all been guidelines from the federal government. The states and local governments shut things down. Sounding like you’re owning the shut down is a massive mistake, in my opinion.

      1. avatar enuf says:

        The necessity of the actions taken was clear. The wrong is in the how it was done, the complete lack of leadership, the lack of any plan at all. The reliance on commands and edicts and orders, none of which should come from any American Governor or President.

    3. avatar Ron says:

      They’re not correct so much as it is they are being deceptive. Make no mistake, they do not, I repeat do not, believe what they are saying. They will bend over backwards with verbal diarrhea to explain why, the next time a democrat is in power, that this doesn’t apply.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      2A doesn’t apply to felons while they are imprisoned. Otherwise, WTF makes you think so?

  20. avatar Shire-man says:

    The only thing that means anything is you have stuff: life, liberty, property and other people want to take your stuff.

    The BoR is just a polite way to say “leave me alone or Ill kill you.”
    That right there is the only thing that is real. The only thing that has ever been or ever will be real. Everything else is just a schoolyard slap fight of idiots seeing which one will cry first or which one will punch first.

    Today they’ll pretend the 10th means one thing and tomorrow they’ll pretend it means another. It’s all so goddamn tiresome.

  21. avatar Hydguy says:

    Funny how they decry federalism when Trump says governors can’t open before the Feds allow them to, but they believe in it for abortion, welfare, gay marriage, food stamps, ect..

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Zero Principle + Hypocrisy = The Left

      1. avatar Hydguy says:

        Miner49 to a T

      2. avatar enuf says:

        The Right = Zero Principle + Hypocrisy = The Left

        There, now the equation is balanced.

        1. avatar Hydguy says:

          Wrong.

        2. avatar Dude says:

          Wake up and smell the coffee. They are not one and the same. The left will pick and choose various portions of the Constitution and the Bible when it’s convenient for them. Then they turn around and denigrate both when it isn’t convenient for them. Well, is the Constitution and the Bible right or wrong? Or is it just a means to an end? There are hypocrisy examples on this site practically daily.

          Now this doesn’t mean that democratic voters and pols are automatically bad, and vice versa for republicans. People are people. People in power, like politicians, are often tempted to use their position for their personal gain. This isn’t what I’m referring to.

          The left don’t have principles. They have ideology. They will do everything in their power in order to accomplish their goal. Justice Kavanaugh is an excellent example. Should we “believe all women” or should we have due process? Believing all women is completely mindless and has nothing to do with law and order. Yet, every democrat politician, celebrity, and organization was repeating this, so their brain dead followers would blindly believe the absurd allegations. I’m not some super lifelong close minded right winger. I was raised by liberals. I’ve taken a very close, honest look at both sides. You should too.

        3. avatar Dude says:

          An excellent example of their hypocrisy is to continue with the Kavanaugh case. Look how these same people have been reacting to the Joe Biden accusations. They are either ignoring it or they’re making excuses, or they’re suddenly discovering this thing called due process. They also never took Bill Clinton’s accusations seriously until Hillary lost. Even then, Slick Willy wasn’t dragged through the mud like Kavanaugh was. Zero principles + Hypocrisy. Whatever it takes to get to the goal.

  22. avatar Tired of the bs says:

    Are The People in the 2A not the same people mentioned in the other amendments?

  23. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Now that it’s okay to use the Tenth Amendment according to the Liberals. We will see which states start making it illegal to have an abortion. Which is the way it used to be in this country before the Roe versus Wade court case.
    If you wanted an abortion you travel to another state to get it.

    I have noticed that the states that are really big on abortion rights anytime during the pregnancy. No parents required permission for minors to get an abortion. Those states are gun grabbing state. But states that want to ban abortion are far more likely to defend your second amendment civil rights.

    The same goes for recreational marijuana legalization. Those States will let you smoke pot. But they won’t let you have a gun. They are very restrictive when it comes to civil rights.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      You’d think that the ACLU would be working overtime right now to protect rights. Instead of trying to keep overreaching governments in check, they’re busy trying to get prisoners released and protecting abortion.

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        The ACLU has never supported civil rights. They have never supported the 1st amendment. The supported cases that helped to destroy society.
        Anyone who believes they support free speech is just a fool.

        1. avatar Dude says:

          I was being sarcastic. The ACLU is just another wing of the DNC.

  24. avatar strych9 says:

    Personally I think Trump’s statements here are being overhyped.

    Viewed through the lens of the current race between Blue and Red states to open up in a “safe manner” and get people back to work and the fact that this is an election year I would suggest that Trump is just jockeying/posturing here.

    A state like Wisconsin just slapped another 30 days on the their “Stay at Home” order. So, Trump’s banking that R’s look good if they manage to open up safely and the stragglers, in his mind hopefully Blue states, look bad. In some regards leadership is partly luck and perception. Trump would appear to know this and be betting on one of two choices.

    It’s also true, IMHO, that there isn’t much of a choice here. 16-20 million people out of work in the last month and an economy in complete free-fall. Landlords are trying to evict people over this, sometimes illegally, and banks are going to foreclose mortgages, at least until they realize that they’re cutting their own throats. This could go from bad to worse really quickly if we’re not careful (which someone like Gretchen Whitmer is not being).

    Simply put: the status quo cannot continue. At some point people will realize they’re going to lose everything if they don’t go back to work and at that point it won’t matter what the governor says. If they can’t find legit employment they’ll turn to alternative means to make money. At that point you’ve got anarchy unless the government clamps down hard and if they do that you’ve probably got a civil war on your hands. People faced with losing their homes and not being able to feed their kids will take risks most Americans can’t yet imagine and if those risks are “defying the powers that be” shit’s gonna get bloody if the powers that be feel the need to show they are not to be defied.

    There’s always a political angle here and that’s very likely what we’re seeing with this kind of thing. Just another flavor of what Carville was saying about primaries or the political games any of the other “names” are playing right now.

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      “….Simply put: the status quo cannot continue..”

      As you describe, things can go bad quickly, much worse than they are. A couple of States need to return to normal operations to show the rest of country that things ‘will’ return to normal soon.

    2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

      Trump says “I HAVE THE AUTHORITY” Governors all cry out “NUH-UHHH” that’s OUR job! then Trump sits back with that Cheshire Cat grin and watches as the Governors fight it out to see who can get going the fastest… Anyone who takes Trump literally every time he speaks is a chump… He has played the MSM for suckers for years (got millions of dollars in FREE air time from them) and now he’s doing the same thing with the government… He’ll have Pelosi back in D.C. next week just from a stupid little blurb about recess appointments… TDS is a very dangerous and very real thing….

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I think you are missing the best example. For nearly 4 years now, every decision Trump has made has been devastatingly wrong and in fact idiotic and possibly criminal, impeach him and then string him up! In a matter of a couple days, he has gotten the media on board with all the Dem governors insisting that all decisions are up to the governors, so ut cannot be blamed on Trump. Absolutely masterful. Of course, they will either ignore that or make excuses as to why he should have prevented idiots like Cuomo from doing whatever he decides to do. Say, did Cuomo ever use 3000 of the 30,000 ventilators he whined and begged for so pitifully? What a sorry puke.

    3. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      “Landlords are trying to evict people over this, sometimes illegally, and banks are going to foreclose mortgages, at least until they realize that they’re cutting their own throats.”

      Some mortgage holders are being smart about it. One version I have heard is that they will put a ‘pause’ on mortgage itself. Meaning, a 30 year note turns into a 30 year and (X) months note, X being the number of months paused. That will provide some relief, but whole lot of folks will be hurt badly, as you noted, renters.

      I suppose this is all a part of living through world history, as it happens. Hopefully, when we can swim out of it, people will be motivated to start saving money, because overall credit scores are gonna take a serious hit…

    4. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      President Trump knows he can’t force State Governor’s to open our state’s backup. He’s playing a game. And if the governor’s aren’t careful they’ll be voted out of office. The President knows that the voters in those states will understand. That it’s the governor’s they voted for that are keeping them from their jobs. Not the federal government.

      President Trump is banking on the Democrat State Governors saying and doing stupid things. And he didn’t have to wait long for New York and California “to step in it”.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        To be fair, he does have the power to charge them under federal civil rights statutes if they decide to go full CCP.

  25. avatar Don from CT says:

    The Interstate Commerce Clause as well as the General Welfare clause have been (ab)used by the Federal Government and supported by the SCOTUS to undermine the 10th Amendment since 1789.

    While I don’t like the idea of DJT telling states when they can reopen. Its well within his authority based on each of those constitutional clauses.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      10th Amendment did not exist until 1791. Just sayin’.

  26. avatar Prndll says:

    The powers that be don’t seem to either understand or care to acknowledge how embarrassing NBC has become.

  27. avatar burley says:

    Interesting write up. A point I’d like to make:
    The state government also does not have the authority to make me stay home or take my children from me. The constitution does not cease to be in effect at the state level. The list of rights stated there are protected all the way down to the tiniest hamlet. At no level of government does anyone have the legal authority to tell me to stay home, or arrest me for wakeboarding by myself, or walking in the park with me family, or even seizing my stockpile of what ever the frack I decided to by right the hell up because I say both a need and an opportunity before others did. Sufficient jurisprudence has been set to indicate that there’s no legal authority to license drivers or register private motor vehicles. None of that is the problem: the problem is that we let it happen without hanging even ONE over reaching petty tyrant. The last real gasp of Libery happened in Athens, TN just after WWII. Since then we’ve been good little sheep…

    1. avatar burley says:

      Correction:

      …bUy right the hell up because I saW…

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email