by Bruce Webb
Conservatives have long been 2nd Amendment Absolutists (unless you are a black man carrying a stick outside a mostly black precinct in Philadelphia, somehow ‘open carry’ doesn’t apply there). Now they have doubled down with the Tenther Movement, which they have tied together with an Enumerated Powers doctrine which mostly doesn’t actually appear in the text of the Constitution, to launch a renaissance of States’ Rights and even Nullification. Yet this expansive reading of the 2nd and 10th amendments somehow never seems to prevent them from claiming that the Right to Privacy underlying Roe v Wade just isn’t in the Constitution at all. Yet if you apply Tenther logic to the Ninth Amendment as read in light of the Fourth the right to privacy seems pretty much implicit.
Amendment 9 – Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
So like States People have retained rights that only START with the Fourth Amendment
Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Hmm, ‘secure in their persons’. Unless you have a uterus I guess.
This is particularly acute given that Scalia came out and claimed that the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment don’t apply to women as such.
Amendment 14 – Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Sorry ladies, per Scalia you are not even part of the ‘people’ as expressed in the Ninth and Fourth Amendments, or even in principle ether ‘persons’ or ‘citizens’ under the Fourteenth.
Anyone expecting the Teabaggers to come running to join an effort to read the Ninth as broadly as they do the Second and Tenth? Me neither.