Which one do you prefer? I prefer the first, as it limits the power of the Federal Government more. Unfortunately, the Federal courts tend to hold a broad interpretation of the 1st Amendment and it pisses me off.
For example, the ACLU files a lawsuit against a state police officer for wearing a cross or a turban or a [sic] yamalka [/sic] while on duty because they say that violates seperation of church and state. The Roberts Court then rules in the ACLU's favor, by taking a broad interpretation of the 1st Amendment, while ignoring the 10th Amendment altogether, which the Roberts court tends to do quite frequently.
Why do the Federal courts hold that broad interpretation?
For example, the ACLU files a lawsuit against a state police officer for wearing a cross or a turban or a [sic] yamalka [/sic] while on duty because they say that violates seperation of church and state. The Roberts Court then rules in the ACLU's favor, by taking a broad interpretation of the 1st Amendment, while ignoring the 10th Amendment altogether, which the Roberts court tends to do quite frequently.
Why do the Federal courts hold that broad interpretation?
Facebook
Twitter