Why does the government think Federal law Trumps state law if our founding fathers wanted the states to have more power than the government in case the government ever became too corrupt or elitist?
If a state passes a law declaring Marijuana legal, then why do the feds think they have permission to go into that state and target people that are following state law, but not federal?
If a state allows the ownership of an AR-15, and if the AR is outlawed federally, who the fuck gives them the right to go against the will of that state and its people?
There shouldn't even be federal law because there shouldnt be two different systems of law in the country, especially when that federal law doesn't respect the laws of states.
>>80707844
>Interstate commerce
>>80707844
Hey now you know why the civil war really happened!
>>80707844
Did you goto school at all? States rights is an important concept but states can only make laws that don't conflict with existing federal regulations.
>>80707844
As a lawyer, all I can say is that I am baffled you would ask this. The federal government does not "think" it trumps state law, it just does. Every heard of the supremacy clause? It is in the Constitution. Furthermore, news flash, the articles of confederation failed for a reason, states with ultimate power did not work, and never will, that is why we have strong federal government. If you need clarification, actually read the Constitution sometime. The Constitution is quite clear, any power not directly enumerated to the federal government is reserved to the states. For example, states have police power. Also as a side note, I really hate right wing jackasses who talk about what the "framers wanted" when it is not in the Constitution. If they wanted it, it is in the Constitution like in order to own a gun you should be in a militia.
>>80709696
Seriously, this guy is the embodiment of /pol/: uneducated, gun clinging, retated.
>>80707844
Yeah, that's why the Civil War happened. The result of the war is that the federal government will kill you if you disobey too much.
>>80710417
>If they wanted it, it is in the Constitution like in order to own a gun you should be in a militia.
Talk about not reading the constitution. The Supreme Court, whose establishment and powers are enumerated in Article...I want to say 3? of the US Constitution, ruled that the militia is every single person in the US over the age of 18. The Supreme Court having the highest judicial authority allows them to make rulings on, among other things, what is and is not within the bounds of the Constitution.
>>80710881
OK? I agree the Supreme Court is the final say on the Constitution, when did I say otherwise? I guess you got me? In regards to the opinion you mention, There is a pained anyalsis by scailia regarding the second amendment clauses\grammar to find that outcome. Just because I disagree with the court, does not mean I don't understand the ruling. It was an incorrect analysis in my opinion. The court attempted to couch itself in originalism, but strayed outside its own theory of interpretation in order to find s way to ensure average Americans can have guns. The court's interpretation, in effect, made the militia aspect of the second amendment basically nonexistent. everything in the Constitution has a meaning and should have effect. Last I checked, being an American allowed me to have opinions.
>>80707844
What is the supremacy clause?
Shay's Rebellion happened as a result of the weakness of the Articles of Confederation (The governing document of America before the Constitution was written) because the federal government was pretty much just a meeting point of state governments to gather at rather than an actual force.
It sucks, but, at least back then, the federal government needed more power to enforce the peace and we're seeing the aftereffects of that today.
Google Shay's Rebellion if you want more info.
>>80710417
>>80711649
Go back to >>>reddit
