Constitutional Law for dummies

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
21,034
28,695
93d 18h 53m
Cad Cad Here was some research I was reading on the subject.


Yea I'd question that entire paper when it starts out saying the Federal Govt. is authorized to enforce quarantines under the commerce clause with no analysis and no citation to SCOTUS holdings.

The commerce clause literally says "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes"

And that paper says:

"Federal quarantine and isolation authority derives from the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution"

The paper may or may not be a correct interpretation of federal statutes and agency interrelationships but it does a piss poor job of the constitutional part.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: AngryGerbil

zzeris

Vermin Supreme
<Silver Donator>
11,809
29,137
120d 14h 35m
This is honestly one reason I enjoy studying it. It has so many layers and permutations. Its frustrating and yet fascinating.

Good luck in your studies. While Brosar is right in how PC academia is, I've had some fantastic teachers over the years especially in my Masters work 5 years ago. Hopefully, you will be one for your future students. Health Law was one of my hardest yet most fascinating classes. Graduate studies are so much more rewarding it sometimes amazes me.
 

LachiusTZ

Date the ban will be lifted: Never
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
12,855
24,159
This was my favorite subject in my law classes.

But after the two semesters there wasn't a lot of classes to follow.

Lack of constitutional law was prolly one of the main reasons I didn't go to law school.
 

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
21,034
28,695
93d 18h 53m
This was my favorite subject in my law classes.

But after the two semesters there wasn't a lot of classes to follow.

Lack of constitutional law was prolly one of the main reasons I didn't go to law school.

There's just not much actual work in Con Law unless you want to represent criminal defendants. Constitutional issues more or less never come up in commercial (i.e. paying) cases.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Sanrith Descartes

Sanrith Descartes

I love my shiny new medal, LLR
<Gold Donor>
14,158
35,284
85d 11h 32m
This was my favorite subject in my law classes.

But after the two semesters there wasn't a lot of classes to follow.

Lack of constitutional law was prolly one of the main reasons I didn't go to law school.
Yeah its almost more of scholarly pursuit beyond Con Law 1-3. Which seems sort of counter-intuitive. One would think it would be a mainstay subject for law schools.

Edit: Cad just explained it.
 

Sanrith Descartes

I love my shiny new medal, LLR
<Gold Donor>
14,158
35,284
85d 11h 32m
Sanrith Descartes Sanrith Descartes with your previous studies you must have read some good books on u.s. governments and civics. Any suggestions? Textbooks or regular books.
I would start with some basic by the giants in the field. Seminal works.
Robert Dahl - On Democracy. Polyarchy.
Samuel Huntington - Clash of Civilizations. The 3rd Wave.
Larry Dodd - Congress Reconsidered.
Joe Schumpeter - Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
Morris Fiorina - Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment
Andrew Chadwick - Internet Politics

That should be a decent start
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: sleevedraw and Foler

Sanrith Descartes

I love my shiny new medal, LLR
<Gold Donor>
14,158
35,284
85d 11h 32m
Finished the first case study in my book. Is corporal punishment (paddling) in schools a violation of the Constitution (specifically the 8th Amendment and 14th (due process)).

The interesting thing isn't the outcome (it isnt unconstitutional) but the different reasonings that the assorted Justices used in affirming/dissenting. Which is pretty much the core element of the book. Why they rule the way they do.
 

LachiusTZ

Date the ban will be lifted: Never
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
12,855
24,159
Anyone have thoughts on mandated masks in public?

Feels like an over reach.

The Corona thread is a shit show for any meaningful response.

Cad Cad want to swing through here and give us the $5000/hr answer? Lol
 
  • 1Picard
Reactions: Mudcrush Durtfeet

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
21,034
28,695
93d 18h 53m
Anyone have thoughts on mandated masks in public?

Feels like an over reach.

The Corona thread is a shit show for any meaningful response.

Cad Cad want to swing through here and give us the $5000/hr answer? Lol

I don't think it's really a constitutional issue, there are older SCOTUS cases from the 1918 pandemic and previous quarantines saying the govt's do have the power to do relatively invasive things for public health reasons.

The question I have is whether they can quarantine and limit otherwise healthy people - I think it's clear they can impose restrictions on sick people, but healthy people?

It's not a clear constitutional issue though, there's no clause or amendment on point. Especially as relating to the state governments which are the ones doing this shit.
 

Sanrith Descartes

I love my shiny new medal, LLR
<Gold Donor>
14,158
35,284
85d 11h 32m
My amateur two cents. I agree there is settled case law on the needs to keep people safe trumping the civil liberties of infected/carriers. I have read snippets of opinions in those same cases where it was specifically questioned by Justices in terms of applying to healthy people.

I dont feel the rulings of forced evacuations due to gas main break etc could be successfully used for this. I also don't think one of the first acts was closing the courts to normal business was a coincidence. I honestly feel there are governors going with better to take the slap on the wrist after the fact. Its not like they can be sued or held liable afterwards.

But I am an amateur on a gaming forum so odds are I am totally wrong on this shit.
 

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
21,034
28,695
93d 18h 53m
My amateur two cents. I agree there is settled case law on the needs to keep people safe trumping the civil liberties of infected/carriers. I have read snippets of opinions in those same cases where it was specifically questioned by Justices in terms of applying to healthy people.

I dont feel the rulings of forced evacuations due to gas main break etc could be successfully used for this. I also don't think one of the first acts was closing the courts to normal business was a coincidence. I honestly feel there are governors going with better to take the slap on the wrist after the fact. Its not like they can be sued or held liable afterwards.

But I am an amateur on a gaming forum so odds are I am totally wrong on this shit.

Suing states is very difficult under the best of circumstances due to sovereign immunity. States have to pass acts allowing you to sue them for things they find politically required.

Look up the torts claims act in your local state and start reading about the narrow things you're allowed to sue them for.
 

LachiusTZ

Date the ban will be lifted: Never
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
12,855
24,159
I don't think it's really a constitutional issue, there are older SCOTUS cases from the 1918 pandemic and previous quarantines saying the govt's do have the power to do relatively invasive things for public health reasons.

The question I have is whether they can quarantine and limit otherwise healthy people - I think it's clear they can impose restrictions on sick people, but healthy people?

It's not a clear constitutional issue though, there's no clause or amendment on point. Especially as relating to the state governments which are the ones doing this shit.

Going to come back to this eventually. Fucking swamped right now.

Invasive =\= coerced action.

It definitely does not follow the decency laws, I don't think. Could in some round about way etc

Maybe it's that I personally don't like being told what to do. Lol
 

Sanrith Descartes

I love my shiny new medal, LLR
<Gold Donor>
14,158
35,284
85d 11h 32m
Suing states is very difficult under the best of circumstances due to sovereign immunity. States have to pass acts allowing you to sue them for things they find politically required.

Look up the torts claims act in your local state and start reading about the narrow things you're allowed to sue them for.
But arent civil rights violations one of those things they dont have immunity from?
 

LachiusTZ

Date the ban will be lifted: Never
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
12,855
24,159
I would start with some basic by the giants in the field. Seminal works.
Robert Dahl - On Democracy. Polyarchy.
Samuel Huntington - Clash of Civilizations. The 3rd Wave.
Larry Dodd - Congress Reconsidered.
Joe Schumpeter - Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
Morris Fiorina - Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment
Andrew Chadwick - Internet Politics

That should be a decent start

I think on democracy is in a closet at my dad's house.

I might have some old syllabuses left, I tried to keep them because I really admire d that professor
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Sanrith Descartes

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
21,034
28,695
93d 18h 53m
But arent civil rights violations one of those things they dont have immunity from?

Not really, and this question is enormously complex because of contradictory SCOTUS rulings. It's not an easy 1,2 type of analysis.
 

Sanrith Descartes

I love my shiny new medal, LLR
<Gold Donor>
14,158
35,284
85d 11h 32m
Not really, and this question is enormously complex because of contradictory SCOTUS rulings. It's not an easy 1,2 type of analysis.
I think you are saying this just to reinforce the exorbitant fees lawyers charge. "Trust me Mr. Jones, the law surrounding your traffic ticket is quite complex. Oh, here is your billable hours sheet". 😃

Joking of course. Mostly 😆