Frankly...

Follow @frankm on Micro.blog.

Is recognizing rights of citizens in the United States a bad thing? My understanding of the United States Constitution is that its purpose is to prevent the Federal government from becoming tyrannical by narrowing its power to enumerated rights. The Constitution does not exist to define the rights of citizens and I am pretty sure Madison did not imagine that the Bill of Rights defined the only rights of U.S. citizens. Therefore it seems to me that the very act of removing rights from citizens through declaring that SCOTUS decisions granted rights not provided for in the Constitution is the exact opposite of an originalist understanding of the Constitution. Roe v. Wade restrains the Federal government from taking a women’s right of autonomy over their own body, a right by the way that many of been claiming is the reason why things like “mask mandates” and “vaccine mandates’ are not constitutional.

Surprise Me
Participate in the conversation
Linkblog of sources
See What Else I Am Doing