Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LMAO, no where in the Constitution did the founders conflate the rights of the people with States rights and powers or the powers granted to the federal government. The people always carries a meaning of individual citizens.
.
First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Perhaps you should do some research on the topic. The effect is they got 40% less congressional representation than they would have, had they gotten their way of counting all slaves as a person. With the passage of the 14th Amendment they actually gained representatives.Nope. The northern states argued that they should therefore count their pigs and cows as "people" since they held the same standing under law as slaves.
See Scott v Sandford USSC Judge Taney opinion of the court.
You claimed the southern states lost representation. They actually got 60% more than they were entitled to under the law that existed until the 13th amendment.That decision was issued almost 80 years after the Constitution was enacted. You got anything relevant to the constitutional debates?
The same would hold for phone records. They are also business records the government can subpoena. The person has no expectation that when and who he's making phone calls to will remain private.So tell the class how a subpoena, granted to a prosecutor and signed by a judge is any different than a search warrant issued to law enforcement and signed by a judge. Probable cause has to be demonstrated in both cases.
Decided in 2010, in a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited, because doing so would violate the First Amendment.
I thought the first amendment was an individual, not a corporate (group) right.
It was already ruled that bank records like deposit slips are not personal records, but business records. The same with checks. You have no right to privacy against the bank disclosing them.
You're getting slow with that shit. I already posted the case 15 minutes before you asked for a link.
Their tax status.How are corporations different from unions?
Ther are no such things as group rights. There are only Individual rights. Rights don't come as groups. They come as individuals.
Educate yourself, you look silly. Respectfully speaking.In the 2010 case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC), the most sweeping expansion of corporate rights yet
Corporations are GROUPS, and citizens united granted them collective group rights.
Decided in 2010, in a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited, because doing so would violate the First Amendment.Bullshit, Citizens United was about the government suppressing the release of a movie that was critical of the bitch. Similarly the government argued in the case they had the authority to suppress books that espoused political opinions.
I thought the first amendment was an individual, not a corporate (group) right.
www.britannica.com
You love demonstrating what a moron you are, dontcha?LMAO, no where in the Constitution did the founders conflate the rights of the people with States rights and powers or the powers granted to the federal government. The people always carries a meaning of individual citizens.
.First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Thanks for pointing that out. As Texas said, rights are "individual rights" and not "group" rights. The exercise of religion is an individual right, and not a group right, which means they can impose limits on how big a group can exercise that right together.
That link didn't back up your bullshit. Get a real one, Moron.It was already ruled that bank records like deposit slips are not personal records, but business records. The same with checks. You have no right to privacy against the bank disclosing them.You're getting slow with that shit. I already posted the case 15 minutes before you asked for a link.
Let's look at what it meant.What did you not understand about the 3/5ths clause being a compromise to get the southern States to ratify the Constitution. There would have been no Constitution without it.
.
The discussion was on Constitutional rights.............but let's run with your diversion.Their tax status.How are corporations different from unions?
LMAO, no where in the Constitution did the founders conflate the rights of the people with States rights and powers or the powers granted to the federal government. The people always carries a meaning of individual citizens.
.First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Thanks for pointing that out. As Texas said, rights are "individual rights" and not "group" rights. The exercise of religion is an individual right, and not a group right, which means they can impose limits on how big a group can exercise that right together.
The same would hold for phone records. They are also business records the government can subpoena. The person has no expectation that when and who he's making phone calls to will remain private.So tell the class how a subpoena, granted to a prosecutor and signed by a judge is any different than a search warrant issued to law enforcement and signed by a judge. Probable cause has to be demonstrated in both cases.
The constitution is clear in that people are allowed to petition Congress. Duh.
Corporations themselves, however are not people with collective rights.
An owner of a corporation represents the corporation as an Individual. Therefore said owner may petition congress.
Um, Unions have been contributing to candidates for decades, you blithering nincompoop.The constitution is clear in that people are allowed to petition Congress. Duh.
Corporations themselves, however are not people with collective rights.
An owner of a corporation represents the corporation as an Individual. Therefore said owner may petition congress.
I went over it. Citizens united gave corporations the rights normally held for individuals. Such as contributing to political candidates.
I'm going with OKtexas that the 1st amendment is an individual right.Please quote the part of the Constitution that says "If you have X number of people together, the individual right to exercise your freedom of religion is denied".
I'll await your dumbass spin..................
It does. But you have to read it.That link didn't back up your bullshit. Get a real one, Moron.You're getting slow with that shit. I already posted the case 15 minutes before you asked for a link.
The constitution is clear in that people are allowed to petition Congress. Duh.
Corporations themselves, however are not people with collective rights.
An owner of a corporation represents the corporation as an Individual. Therefore said owner may petition congress.
I went over it. Citizens united gave corporations the rights normally held for individuals. Such as contributing to political candidates.
I'm going with OKtexas that the 1st amendment is an individual right.Please quote the part of the Constitution that says "If you have X number of people together, the individual right to exercise your freedom of religion is denied".
I'll await your dumbass spin..................
Are you saying unions should have their income taxed like they are corporations? If not, why not?
