Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire US Constitution and the SCOTUS

It does appear to be ground regained in regards to States' rights, but whether or not it can be held and expanded remains to be seen. Complete restoration of the Tenth Amendment would be quite a spectacle, if you think about it. It surely would be chaotic---at least for a time, but it's badly needed.

Well yeah, but there’s nothing in the constitution that prohibited states leaving the union either. You see how that went.

The 9th amendment, which precedes the 10th, specifically addresses "other" rights not enumerated in Constitution. The decision written by Alito completely ignored the 9th Amendment as though it did not exist. The clear plain language of the ninth amendment states that there are "other" rights not listed in the Constitution, and those rights are "retained by the people."

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."


e·nu·mer·a·tion noun the action of mentioning a number of things one by one.

Alito's Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment

The 9th amendment, which precedes the 10th, specifically addresses "other" rights not enumerated in Constitution. The decision written by Alito completely ignored the 9th Amendment as though it did not exist. The clear plain language of the ninth amendment states that there are "other" rights not listed in the Constitution, and those rights are "retained by the people."

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."


e·nu·mer·a·tion noun the action of mentioning a number of things one by one.

Alito's Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment

“Natural rights” those granted by nature and/or G-d. Abortion doesn’t fit either of those because nowhere in nature or in G-d’s Kingdom is there an inherent right to kill your progeny.

The 9th amendment, which precedes the 10th, specifically addresses "other" rights not enumerated in Constitution. The decision written by Alito completely ignored the 9th Amendment as though it did not exist. The clear plain language of the ninth amendment states that there are "other" rights not listed in the Constitution, and those rights are "retained by the people."

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."


e·nu·mer·a·tion noun the action of mentioning a number of things one by one.

Alito's Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment

The 9th amendment, which precedes the 10th, specifically addresses "other" rights not enumerated in Constitution. The decision written by Alito completely ignored the 9th Amendment as though it did not exist. The clear plain language of the ninth amendment states that there are "other" rights not listed in the Constitution, and those rights are "retained by the people."

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."


e·nu·mer·a·tion noun the action of mentioning a number of things one by one.

Alito's Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment

Well it could be argued otherwise, iffy but

Article IV

Section 3

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

The 9th amendment, which precedes the 10th, specifically addresses "other" rights not enumerated in Constitution. The decision written by Alito completely ignored the 9th Amendment as though it did not exist. The clear plain language of the ninth amendment states that there are "other" rights not listed in the Constitution, and those rights are "retained by the people."

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."


e·nu·mer·a·tion noun the action of mentioning a number of things one by one.

Alito's Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment

Thinking to myself, this morning.......The ruling on abortion, and the explanation that justice Thomas gave, that it is not covered in the Constitution, therefore it is up to each state to rule upon it, independently.

Does this mean IF it's not in the Constitution, it's not covered by the federal government, correct? And should be handed down to the states?

So, national forests/blm land should be handled by each state? Welfare and unemployment? EPA/endangered species protection act? Car mileage/emissions? That's just a start.....the list would be huge, I'm sure.

If so, what an opportunity to regain state's rights (or at least some of them).....and, keep the liberals penned up, in the states they came from.

What says you? I'm I off base? Pipe dream? On drugs? Getting senile? All the above???

OR.....just another brainwashed American, that has been conditioned to federal overreach?

Andy3

Retain, verb, continue to have, keep possession of.

The rights referred to in the 9th were rights that the people already had. You can't retain something you've never had. Unless you can show a right to abortion existing in 1791, your point is absurd.

Here is my answer to the question: Founding era history strongly supports the view that abortion rights, at least during the early stages of pregnancy, do fall within the orbit of Madison's Ninth Amendment. "When the United States was founded and for many subsequent decades, Americans relied on the English common law," explained an amicus brief filed in Dobbs by the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians. "The common law did not regulate abortion in early pregnancy. Indeed, the common law did not even recognize abortion as occurring at that stage. That is because the common law did not legally acknowledge a fetus as existing separately from a pregnant woman until the woman felt fetal movement, called 'quickening,' which could occur as late as the 25th week of pregnancy."

William Blackstone's widely read Commentaries on the Laws of England, first published in 1765, made this exact point: Life "begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother's womb." Under the common law, Blackstone explained, legal penalties for abortion only occurred "if a woman is quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her womb."

Blackstone's work was a major influence on America's founding generation. The founders read Blackstone and they well understood that abortion was legal during the early stages of pregnancy under the common law. What is more, because every state at the time of the founding followed the common law as described by Blackstone, no state originally possessed the lawful power to prohibit abortion before quickening. We might call this the original understanding of the regulatory powers of the states.

That same original understanding extends to the Ninth Amendment. Because the states followed the common law at the founding, the American people originally understood that lawmakers lacked the lawful power to prohibit women from ending an unwanted pregnancy during its early stages. The freedom to end an unwanted pregnancy before quickening thus falls within the original meaning and understanding of a right "retained by the people.

This medical handbook provided home remedies for a variety of ailments, allowing people to handle their more minor illnesses at home, like a fever or gout. One entry, however, was "for the suppression of the courses", which Farrell discovered meant a missed menstrual period.

"[The book] starts to prescribe basically all of the best-known herbal abortifacients and contraceptives that were circulating at the time," Farrell said. "It's just sort of a greatest hits of what 18th-century herbalists would have given a woman who wanted to end a pregnancy early."

"It's very explicit, very detailed, [and] also very accurate for the time in terms of what was known ... for how to end a pregnancy pretty early on."

Farrell said the book was immensely popular, and she did not find any evidence of objections to the inclusion of the section.

"It didn't really bother anybody that a typical instructional manual could include material like this," she said. "It just wasn't something to be remarked upon. It was just a part of everyday life."

The 10th A is VERY clear and complements the 9th and is EXACTLY why the SCOTUS ruled to return the abortion issue back to the states and/or the people.
The 9th reserves non enumerated rights to the people, NOT the federal government. The 10th reinforced the 9th and protects the states and us from an over reaching federal authority.
It was the only Constitutionally correct decision they could make.