[Cialug] Telecom Immunity
tdwalton at gmail.com
Thu Jul 10 22:15:02 CDT 2008
On Wed, Jul 9, 1788 at 11:19 PM, Alexander Hamilton wrote:
> I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and in
> the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary
> in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would
> contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on
> this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than
> were granted.
I'm not sure about this. Without the Bill of Rights, politicians
might have found it easier throw it all out that much sooner. Do you
think the Supreme Court could have affirmed a citizen's right to bear
arms last month if there wasn't an amendment supporting it? Anti-gun
sentiment is so strong that we'd have been disarmed ages ago if not
for that amendment.
I think you're right, Alexander, that the Bill of Rights violate a
logical aesthetic, and, worse, casts a hazy glow of legitimacy to the
practice of regulating anything not specifically covered in it. But I
also think it was a practical measure, designed to fend off political
decay for as long as possible.
More information about the Cialug