 | LanceRoxas (41)
04/07/2005 |  It needs to be understood that the Bill of Rights wasn't originally added to the constitution for a reason- because the powers granted it were already enumerated. The argument for the addition was a concession to republican states rights advocates who believed the newly enacted federal system would encroach on states rights- not individual rights. The republican view held that the authority was best vested in the people as close to home as possible not consolidated in Washington. Therefore the adddition of the Bill of Rights was a redundancy added to the contract to ensure the federal government couldn't legislate against these additional rights- ONLY THE STATES COULD through a devolved republican system. In the context of the arguments made it is absolutely hysterical to hear people promote this procedural autonomy thesis of counter-majoritarianism. Federalists who were defeated roundly were the first proponents of counter-majoritarianism in the context of wealth preservation. In the 1800 elections this concept was thoroughly rejected at the polls.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
