constitution

You hear it all the time. The GOP and much of the right wing claim unwavering support for the Constitution and freedom. Yet when a religious issue comes up, they go back against their words.

The latest example is the mosque that is slated to be built about two blocks away from where the World Trade Center fell. While it may indeed be an act of Islamic triumphalism, it is not the place of government to restrict a religious entity from building a place of worship.

On Thursday, Massachusetts District Judge Joseph Tauro issued rulings in two cases related to Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act.  Section 3 defines marriage at the federal level to be between on man and one woman.

The ruling in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management is based on Equal Protection through the Fifth Amendment; Massachusetts v. Dep't of Health & Human Services through the Tenth Amendment.  Neither case affects Section 2, which allows states to choose whether or not to recognize same-sex marriages from other states.

Many Conservatives seem to be calling for a repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  They claim that, by taking the vote for Senators away from the people and giving it back to the state legislatures, it will return to the States a voice in Washington they no longer have.

I disagree.

The assumption made by critics of the Seventeenth Amendment is that Senators would be more likely to protect States' Rights if they were appointed by legislatures rather than voters.  Gene Healy even said that the Seventeenth Amendment "has done untold damage to federalism and limited government."  What these critics fail to recognize is the history behind the Seventeenth Amendment.

There's an interesting case in the 8th Circuit regarding the right to a trial by jury as protected by the Sixth Amendment for domestic assault.  What particularly piqued my interest was not the DUI charge, but rather a comparison that was made by the court when making a reference to existing Sixth Amendment case law.

In United States v. Jardee, the defendant was charged with assault and battery under 18 USC 113(a)(4).  That crime carries a maximum six months of imprisonment and/or $5,000 fine, which makes it a Class B Misdemeanor and a petty offense under federal statutory law.

During the Great Depression, the FDR administration imposed limits on crop production to artificially increase the price of food.  Yeah, that makes PERFECT sense when people are starving and is another reason why I believe the policies of the FDR administration led to the Great Depression being much worse than it could've been.

A man by the name of Roscoe Filburn was told to plant a little over 10 acres of wheat.  He planted that 10 acres and sold it on the market.  However, he also planted an additional ten for consumption by his own family to save money due to lack of revenue because of the limits on how much he could plant.  His reasoning was that since the wheat was never entering the market, it was not subject to federal regulation under the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

The Oklahoma House Public Safety Committee has passed to the floor House Bill 3157, which is an amendment to 21 O.S. 2001, Section 1289.2.  It adds the following paragraph:

The Legislature further finds that the citizens of Oklahoma shall not be required to participate in any international, state or federal firearms registration program nor shall any firearm lawfully owned and possessed by a citizen of this state be subject to confiscation unless such firearm has been used for unlawful purposes in violation of the Oklahoma Statutes.

This bill, if passed, will be effective November 1, 2010.  It is obviously in response to the Federal proposal that the United States signs on to a treaty with the UN regarding international firearms registration.

Call your Representatives and Senators and let's get this passed!