Comment: I don't follow your reasoning....

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Whoa yourself... (see in situ)

I don't follow your reasoning....

The 14th amendment clearly states:

"[No State shall]...deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

But then you say:

"That is more like it but it still regulates the power either way to the states."

No, it does not leave the power with the States. That's the whole point. When it says "No State shall..." that means that if a State does "deprive any person of life...without due process of law", the federal government (presumably the courts) has a right to intervene to stop it.

What else could it reasonably mean? "No State shall do this, but if they do, well then they're allowed to...." Huh? That makes no sense. Clearly the 14th amendment establishes the supremacy of federal law over state law when state law violates the constitutional rights of a person. Otherwise it means nothing.

"Just not okay with any interference by the FEDS for anything other than what's enumerated under law by our Founding Fathers."

The power of the federal government to interfere in state affairs in defense of someone's constitutional rights IS enumerated in the constitution, namely in the 14th amendment - federal courts have every right to strike down State laws which "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."