What do you think they meant?

4

44 AMP

Staff
Did some thinking the other day, and I got to wondering about the difference in the language in our Bill of Rights. So, I would like your opinions on what you think they meant.

What is the difference between "Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed"?

They seem to mean the same thing, but because of the different language, there is an implied difference. So, come on you legal eagles, barracks lawyers, and just anybody with an opinion, what do you think the difference is, and why.

And what should the difference be?
 
Not sure I should really opine on this specific topic, as I am not experienced with law in anyway. Nor do I know by heart the wording of every amendment and right. But I would think it's too much like comparing apples and oranges with all the time that has passed since this country's founding. Issues back then are not the same as they are today. And those that are the same, were no where near as complicated then, as they are now. Sorry, just admitting my ignorance.:cool:
 
"Congress shall make no law" implies that the rights it refers to can be infringed, but not by the Federal government.
"Shall not be infringed" implies that the government must leave the right alone regardless of level.
Or so I've always been told.

Amendment 14 art.1 supercedes that, implying that *all* rights are inviolable, including those not specifically mentioned (9th Amdt).

Of course, what really matters is how our government interprets it. They don't really seem to care.
 
What is the difference between "Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed"?
Click to expand...
"Congress shall make no law" = Congress has no legislative authority in this matter.

"Shall not be infringed" = shall not be interfered with, tampered with or screwed with in ANY way by ANY person, group of persons or organization.

Seems pretty straightforward to me...
 
Last edited:
I believe that "shall not be infringed" means "shall not be infringed by Congress". I think that for the Second Amendment to limit the States it would have to say something like "no State shall infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms" and also say that "Congress shall have power to enforce this provision".

I don't think we can just assume that a part of the US Constitution limits the States because it doesn't say otherwise, because that is to assume that the US has jurisdiction unless the Constitution says otherwise, and that is not a vision of limited federal government.
 
Congress shall make no law means that he Federal government cannot violate this right or interfere with the States or individuals in _______ area. The purpose of Bill of Rights was to prevent the Federal government from interfering with the rights of the States and of the people of those States. In regard to rights, the Constitution is supposed to apply to controling the power of the Federal government. Period.


UNFORTUNATELY, the 14th amendment changed the the very nature of the ORIGINAL intent of the Federal government and made it a centralized goverment able to control ALL levels of authority.

FORTUNATELY, on our side we have the fact that the 14th amendment was not ever legally ratified and it flies in the face of very intent of the Founding Fathers.
 
I think that for the Second Amendment to limit the States it would have to say something like "no State shall infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms" and also say that "Congress shall have power to enforce this provision".
Click to expand...
"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."
- Amendment 10, Bill of Rights
 
I think it means that not only may Congress not pass a law but neither shall the Executive nor the Judicial do anything by way of rule or regulation.
 
It means they cant go door to door asking for youre firearms someday and if they try they'll get them one bullet at a time. That's not going to stop them from trying to make them illegal though. Given time and Hillary I expect to see some form of tax/insurance increase to law abiding gun owners. Democrats suck!
 
The Tenth

"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."
Click to expand...

I don't think we can construe the Tenth Amendment to mean that powers within Virginia are reserved to the people of the whole US. The Tenth, the "States' Rights Amendment", says that powers are reserved to each State respectively and that means "individually".

I believe the meaning is that powers within Virginia, unless delegated to the US, are reserved to the Virginia Government, or to Virginians if we have not delegated the power in question to our State government ... I think New York said it best:

"that every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the Government thereof, remains to the People of the several States, or to their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same" -New York's Request for the Tenth Amendment
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top