The United States needs 10th amendment judges.

[Ifreann]

I do. And so do you. You seem not to like it. And your own proposed solution to that problem is to move. So, you know. Get packing.

The US isn't Unitary its a federal system.

The US isn't a federation of dozens of nations.

This country was never intended to be ruled under a single unitary code of laws.

Weird that the Constitution is the supreme law, then.

The United States more like the EU a union of sovergn states. The states (Original ones) predated the federal government and as such the federal government is the child of the states not the other way around.

The 13 colonies that founded America were not sovereign states prior to founding the US. They were colonies. They became independent by founding the United States and winning the resulting war. And they added more states by conquering, murdering, and colonising their way west.

[Ethel mermania]

The US isn't Unitary its a federal system.

The US isn't a federation of dozens of nations.

This country was never intended to be ruled under a single unitary code of laws.

Weird that the Constitution is the supreme law, then.

The United States more like the EU a union of sovergn states. The states (Original ones) predated the federal government and as such the federal government is the child of the states not the other way around.

The 13 colonies that founded America were not sovereign states prior to founding the US. They were colonies. They became independent by founding the United States and winning the resulting war. And they added more state by conquering, murdering, and colonising their way west.

Between the revolution and the ratification of the constitution, the states were sovereign. The Colonies saw themselves as independent states ( drove George Washington nuts). The states never completely gave up sovereignty after the constitution, but it is limited.

The current federal court system has under its jurisdiction enforcement and interpretation of the 10th amendment. Not really seeing the point of more courts

[Ifreann]

The US isn't a federation of dozens of nations.

Weird that the Constitution is the supreme law, then.

The 13 colonies that founded America were not sovereign states prior to founding the US. They were colonies. They became independent by founding the United States and winning the resulting war. And they added more state by conquering, murdering, and colonising their way west.

Between the revolution and the ratification of the constitution, the states were sovereign. The Colonies saw themselves as independent states ( drove George Washington nuts). The states never completely gave up sovereignty after the constitution, but it is limited.

They pretty much did, though. The limited self-governance afforded to the states is hardly sovereignty. Suzerainty might be a more apt term if we are to consider America's subdivisions to be nations.

[Thomasi]

The US isn't a federation of dozens of nations.

For ~200 years the colonies were allowed by Great Britain to be quasi independent, and as such they formed their own distinct cultures. So after the 7 years war when GB asked for tax money they threw a fit and decided to become independent. Each colony became an fully independent state that all decided on their own terms to ratify the Articles of Confederation. Then over a decade after the founders wrote up the constitution and the states each decided to join under the promise of a limited central government. States like Vermont were fully independent nations before they ratified the constitution. These 14 states the original 13 plus Vermont all basically ratified a treaty. Where only a small specific number of powers were denied to the states but the rest were powers of the state. They made that clear in the actual constitution and the 10th amendment.

Weird that the Constitution is the supreme law, then.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;

This couldn't be more clear US law is only supreme when its fulfilling a power granted to the federal government by the constitution, not just any law, all laws that are made that are not powers granted to the federal government only apply to federal territories, as the states are not required to enforce said law.

and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby,

This is clear enough, states are bound by treaties created by the federal government.

any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

This is explicate, anything the federal government does that is outside the scope of the constitution is not supreme and state laws override it. People seem to forget this but its clear.

The 13 colonies that founded America were not sovereign states prior to founding the US. They were colonies. They became independent by founding the United States and winning the resulting war. And they added more states by conquering, murdering, and colonising their way west.

They were quasi independent for ~200 years before the war, they were totally independent before ratifying the constitution, and they were quasi independant even as much as securing their own borders until after the civil war when the federal government showed that it could enforce its will. Even then it wasn't until FDR that the federal government had any real affect on peoples.

[Polozenia Zesuplane Luzanii Gornej]

Yes I understand, elections would still happen as we have 5 amendments that mention the right to vote, states are supposed to run like countries with minimal interference from the federal government.

We aren't a confederation, we are a federal republic. There is a difference, and we don't apply for the former.

The consequences do not involve the right to vote, the consequences of the Bill of Rights include the removal of free speech, the pressing of specific religion or ideas, the removal or deregulation of the right to bear arms, the ability for states to quarter the National Guard in any home they wish, the removal of protections against double jeopardy, the ability to not answer potentially incriminating questions, and the protections against search and seizure without cause; the removal of fair and speedy trials, the right to jury trials, and the protections against excess bail and cruel or unusual punishments, and beyond. It has nothing to do with voting rights because the Bill of Rights does not mention it.

wait,well-regulated doesn't men well maintained ? It is old document at all so i think that English back then,explains what is this admendment really about,so deregulation of this is allowed.

[Ifreann]

The US isn't a federation of dozens of nations.

For ~200 years the colonies were allowed by Great Britain to be quasi independent, and as such they formed their own distinct cultures. So after the 7 years war when GB asked for tax money they threw a fit and decided to become independent. Each colony became an fully independent state that all decided on their own terms to ratify the Articles of Confederation. Then over a decade after the founders wrote up the constitution and the states each decided to join under the promise of a limited central government. States like Vermont were fully independent nations before they ratified the constitution. These 14 states the original 13 plus Vermont all basically ratified a treaty. Where only a small specific number of powers were denied to the states but the rest were powers of the state. They made that clear in the actual constitution and the 10th amendment.

Brief periods of arguable independence does not make the US a federation of dozens of nations.

Weird that the Constitution is the supreme law, then.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;

This couldn't be more clear US law is only supreme when its fulfilling a power granted to the federal government by the constitution, not just any law, all laws that are made that are not powers granted to the federal government only apply to federal territories, as the states are not required to enforce said law.

and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby,

This is clear enough, states are bound by treaties created by the federal government.

any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

This is explicate, anything the federal government does that is outside the scope of the constitution is not supreme and state laws override it. People seem to forget this but its clear.

As I said, the Constitution is the supreme law.

The 13 colonies that founded America were not sovereign states prior to founding the US. They were colonies. They became independent by founding the United States and winning the resulting war. And they added more states by conquering, murdering, and colonising their way west.

They were quasi independent for ~200 years before the war,

They were colonies.

they were totally independent before ratifying the constitution, and they were quasi independant even as much as securing their own borders until after the civil war when the federal government showed that it could enforce its will. Even then it wasn't until FDR that the federal government had any real affect on peoples.

George Washington personally led federal troops in enforcing federal law. I'm no historian, but I believe his presidency came several years before that of FDR.

[Thomasi]

Brief periods of arguable independence does not make the US a federation of dozens of nations.

What makes it a federation of nations is that each state had the full option to decide whether to join the union or not, and as such a separate independent nation joined a union of nations. In a few hundred years when Europe is a fully united and federated continent people will be making the same arguments.

As I said, the Constitution is the supreme law.

Yes but the federal government is only supreme in a few areas.

They were colonies.

Okay and their status as colonies doesn't change the fact that they were quasi independant as enforcement of laws from an ocean away in the 15th and 16th hundreds is kind of hard.

George Washington personally led federal troops in enforcing federal law. I'm no historian, but I believe his presidency came several years before that of FDR.

Enforcing a few laws like whisky rebellion doesn't translate to the federal government being of any importance in peoples lives. Up until the civil war most people felt more loyalty to their state than the union. Heck in the war of 1812 it was separate state militias fighting not national army.

[Ifreann]

Brief periods of arguable independence does not make the US a federation of dozens of nations.

What makes it a federation of nations is that each state had the full option to decide whether to join the union or not, and as such a separate independent nation joined a union of nations. In a few hundred years when Europe is a fully united and federated continent people will be making the same arguments.

The states did not have the option to decide whether to join the union or not. They were almost all created by the United States. Its not like all 50 states were already there prior to your war for independence, sovereign nations which all later saw fit to join the US. Hawai'i was, but they sure didn't choose to join the US, you conquered them.

As I said, the Constitution is the supreme law.

Yes but the federal government is only supreme in a few areas.

Which doesn't make the states sovereign nations.

They were colonies.

Okay and their status as colonies doesn't change the fact that they were quasi independant as enforcement of laws from an ocean away in the 15th and 16th hundreds is kind of hard.

That is how colonies tend to work, yes. That doesn't make the US a federation of dozens of sovereign nations.

George Washington personally led federal troops in enforcing federal law. I'm no historian, but I believe his presidency came several years before that of FDR.

Enforcing a few laws like whisky rebellion doesn't translate to the federal government being of any importance in peoples lives. Up until the civil war most people felt more loyalty to their state than the union. Heck in the war of 1812 it was separate state militias fighting not national army.

The President showing up to your town and fucking killing some people kind of sets the precedent that federal law is not something you can opt out of.

[Sorist]

The coalescing of power in the federal government is a long and inevitable trend of American history. In the beginning the Thirteen Colonies were independent States. Not states in the modern American sense but States just as France or Germany are "States" in the international community. During the Confederacy Era the federal government acted as a sounding board for individual state's concerns and a forum for like-minded republics to beat around collective security questions. It had no executive, no judiciary, and no power as we understand it. Although they had different ideas about just what kind of America they were creating, the authors of the American Constitution thought of the "United States" essentially as the framers of the European Union thought of that political project. True power still lived in the States.

Over time, power moved to the federal government. A national bank was set up, whose establishment was greenlighted by the Supreme Court as an "implied power" of Congress. After the Civil War people stopped saying "the United States are" and began saying "the United States is." The Progressive Era sees the federal government really begin to regulate American economic life. It comes to a head with Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, whose relief, reform and recovery boosted federal power to the levels we see today.

America is still one of the most devolved administrations in the world, but it will slowly become less so. This is a global trend, happening in every country and on every continent. The fact of it all is that, as people become more integrated and commerce becomes more interconnected, it becomes much easier for a single administration to govern so many people than it was before. Federal power was not only disliked and distrusted in the Revolutionary Era, but it was also deeply impractical. How could you possibly account for so vast and so diverse a country with so few federal bureaucrats? With technology and time, it's become much easier.

In the light of the historical trend, then, the understanding of the federal powers embedded in the Constitution has evolved, has had to evolve, in fact, because if it did not, America would have long ago fractured into bits. The truth is that 18th-century documents do not govern 21st-century life without a fair bit of "stretching" of the original interpretation. The American Constitution has shown a pretty remarkable ability to adapt to time, but it's arguably showing its tears now. It will be interesting to see how the America's constitutional scaffolding evolves in the next fifty or so years — that is, if it even manages to stay up for that long.

[Polozenia Zesuplane Luzanii Gornej]

What makes it a federation of nations is that each state had the full option to decide whether to join the union or not, and as such a separate independent nation joined a union of nations. In a few hundred years when Europe is a fully united and federated continent people will be making the same arguments.

The states did not have the option to decide whether to join the union or not. They were almost all created by the United States. Its not like all 50 states were already there prior to your war for independence, sovereign nations which all later saw fit to join the US. Hawai'i was, but they sure didn't choose to join the US, you conquered them.

Yes but the federal government is only supreme in a few areas.

Which doesn't make the states sovereign nations.

Okay and their status as colonies doesn't change the fact that they were quasi independant as enforcement of laws from an ocean away in the 15th and 16th hundreds is kind of hard.

That is how colonies tend to work, yes. That doesn't make the US a federation of dozens of sovereign nations.

Enforcing a few laws like whisky rebellion doesn't translate to the federal government being of any importance in peoples lives. Up until the civil war most people felt more loyalty to their state than the union. Heck in the war of 1812 it was separate state militias fighting not national army.

The President showing up to your town and fucking killing some people kind of sets the precedent that federal law is not something you can opt out of.

Original ones existed before though,as colonies.

[The Two Jerseys]

What makes it a federation of nations is that each state had the full option to decide whether to join the union or not, and as such a separate independent nation joined a union of nations. In a few hundred years when Europe is a fully united and federated continent people will be making the same arguments.

The states did not have the option to decide whether to join the union or not. They were almost all created by the United States. Its not like all 50 states were already there prior to your war for independence, sovereign nations which all later saw fit to join the US. Hawai'i was, but they sure didn't choose to join the US, you conquered them.

Yes but the federal government is only supreme in a few areas.

Which doesn't make the states sovereign nations.

Okay and their status as colonies doesn't change the fact that they were quasi independant as enforcement of laws from an ocean away in the 15th and 16th hundreds is kind of hard.

That is how colonies tend to work, yes. That doesn't make the US a federation of dozens of sovereign nations.

Enforcing a few laws like whisky rebellion doesn't translate to the federal government being of any importance in peoples lives. Up until the civil war most people felt more loyalty to their state than the union. Heck in the war of 1812 it was separate state militias fighting not national army.

The President showing up to your town and fucking killing some people kind of sets the precedent that federal law is not something you can opt out of.

You're confusing states and territories. Federal government can create and dissolve territories as it pleases, but creating states requires the consent of the local population.

[Ifreann]

The states did not have the option to decide whether to join the union or not. They were almost all created by the United States. Its not like all 50 states were already there prior to your war for independence, sovereign nations which all later saw fit to join the US. Hawai'i was, but they sure didn't choose to join the US, you conquered them.


Which doesn't make the states sovereign nations.


That is how colonies tend to work, yes. That doesn't make the US a federation of dozens of sovereign nations.


The President showing up to your town and fucking killing some people kind of sets the precedent that federal law is not something you can opt out of.

You're confusing states and territories. Federal government can create and dissolve territories as it pleases, but creating states requires the consent of the local population.

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

[Thomasi]

You're confusing states and territories. Federal government can create and dissolve territories as it pleases, but creating states requires the consent of the local population.

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

I am specifically talking about the original colonies which choose to join the US which BTW the canadian colonies opted out as was their free will as "independent" colonies.

[Ethel mermania]

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

I am specifically talking about the original colonies which choose to join the US which BTW the canadian colonies opted out as was their free will as "independent" colonies.

cAnadian colonies were never in revolt. Nor part of the confederation of states.

[The Two Jerseys]

You're confusing states and territories. Federal government can create and dissolve territories as it pleases, but creating states requires the consent of the local population.

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

The other states also freely chose to join the United States.

[Ethel mermania]

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

The other states also freely chose to join the United States.

But the other states had to meet the requirements set out by congress. Its the reason lincoln though he could stop slavery in the new states and territories but not in the original states or states that were already accepted as slave states.

[Ifreann]

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

I am specifically talking about the original colonies which choose to join the US which BTW the canadian colonies opted out as was their free will as "independent" colonies.

So your argument that the US is today a federation of sovereign nations hinges entirely on the idea that British colonies in America were far away from Britain and therefore were sovereign nations?

---

I am not confusing anything. I am making the point that the states west of the original 13 colonies did not exist as sovereign nations which freely chose to join the United States. They were all created by Americans manifesting their destiny westward.

The other states also freely chose to join the United States.

American colonies becoming American states were obviously not sovereign nations freely joining a federation.

[The Two Jerseys]

I am specifically talking about the original colonies which choose to join the US which BTW the canadian colonies opted out as was their free will as "independent" colonies.

So your argument that the US is today a federation of sovereign nations hinges entirely on the idea that British colonies in America were far away from Britain and therefore were sovereign nations?

---

The other states also freely chose to join the United States.

American colonies becoming American states were obviously not sovereign nations freely joining a federation.

No, it was 13 sovereign nations creating a federation.

It's the other 37 sovereign states that joined it.

[The Archregimancy]

So your argument that the US is today a federation of sovereign nations hinges entirely on the idea that British colonies in America were far away from Britain and therefore were sovereign nations?

---

American colonies becoming American states were obviously not sovereign nations freely joining a federation.

No, it was 13 sovereign nations creating a federation.

It's the other 37 sovereign states that joined it.

Only three previously sovereign states have joined the United States since its formation; these were Vermont, Texas, and Hawai'i. The other new states were either existing territories of the United States that were then admitted into the Union as a result of forming local governments sanctioned by the federal government, or (in the case of Kentucky, Maine, and West Virginia) were formed from the territory of existing states. None of the latter were ever de jure or de facto separate sovereign states.

Hawai'i is an ambiguous case as it was a territory of the United States between the illegal (by subsequent admission of the US government) annexation of the Kingdom of Hawai'i as a US territory and its admission as a state.

[Ifreann]

So your argument that the US is today a federation of sovereign nations hinges entirely on the idea that British colonies in America were far away from Britain and therefore were sovereign nations?

---

American colonies becoming American states were obviously not sovereign nations freely joining a federation.

No, it was 13 sovereign nations creating a federation.

It's the other 37 sovereign states that joined it.

At what point in the process of a territory becoming a state does there exist a sovereign nation?

[Asardia]

You do realize the 14th amendment was a super amendment to the constitution, taking all the previous rights amendments that bound the federal government and applied them to the states, yes?

No it didn't the incorporation doctrine is bullshit it simply required states to treat everyone the same under the law without regard for race or citizenship status. It did not require states to apply the bill of rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... Cruikshank

The only reason why incorporation is "bullshit" is because racists on the Supreme Court wanted the doctrine to not exist. As you can see through the details of the case, the framers of the 14th Amendment clearly intended for the amendment to incorporate the Bill of Rights.

[Thomasi]

No it didn't the incorporation doctrine is bullshit it simply required states to treat everyone the same under the law without regard for race or citizenship status. It did not require states to apply the bill of rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... Cruikshank

The only reason why incorporation is "bullshit" is because racists on the Supreme Court didn't want it to. As you can see through the details of the case, the framers of the 14th Amendment clearly intended for the amendment to incorporate the Bill of Rights.

The 14th amendment was improperly passed because they basically passed it at gun point. Someone should challenge the validity of the amendment. 2/3 of the states did not willingly apply the amendment plus those that redacted it was a mess.

Edit- and yes I'd throw out the whole 14th amendment if it meant I didn't have to live in a country where guns were a federal right. Fuck the Bill of rights made by 18th century aristicrats.

[Asardia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... Cruikshank

The only reason why incorporation is "bullshit" is because racists on the Supreme Court didn't want it to. As you can see through the details of the case, the framers of the 14th Amendment clearly intended for the amendment to incorporate the Bill of Rights.

The 14th amendment was improperly passed because they basically passed it at gun point. Someone should challenge the validity of the amendment. 2/3 of the states did not willingly apply the amendment plus those that redacted it was a mess.

Edit- and yes I'd throw out the whole 14th amendment if it meant I didn't have to live in a country where guns were a federal right. Fuck the Bill of rights made by 18th century aristicrats.

Bro....are you being serious? Does the same logic apply to the 13th and 15th amendments?

[Thomasi]

The 14th amendment was improperly passed because they basically passed it at gun point. Someone should challenge the validity of the amendment. 2/3 of the states did not willingly apply the amendment plus those that redacted it was a mess.

Edit- and yes I'd throw out the whole 14th amendment if it meant I didn't have to live in a country where guns were a federal right. Fuck the Bill of rights made by 18th century aristicrats.

Bro....are you being serious? Does the same logic apply to the 13th and 15th amendments?

Not for the 13th because it was passed during the civil war when the other states left the union, the 15th is also under the same logic as the 14th, and would need to be passed, which even as someone who's half African American I'd be fine with because I'm in MD and it wouldn't affect me lol.

Edit- They litterally held state legislators at gun point for force the passing of the 14th and 15th amendments.

[Ethel mermania]

Bro....are you being serious? Does the same logic apply to the 13th and 15th amendments?

Not for the 13th because it was passed during the civil war when the other states left the union, the 15th is also under the same logic as the 14th, and would need to be passed, which even as someone who's half African American I'd be fine with because I'm in MD and it wouldn't affect me lol.

Edit- They litterally held state legislators at gun point for force the passing of the 14th and 15th amendments.

Southern states were not allowed back into the union without accepting the 13th amendment.