Coby, I have posted to you some possible responses to the question you posed below. I just thought of something else. Laws cannot be enacted under the police
Message 1 of 2
, Mar 1, 2007
I have posted to you some possible responses to the question
you posed below.
I just thought of something else.
Laws cannot be enacted under the "police power" IF
THOSE LAWS, subvert or injuriously restrain under COLOR
of securing those rights.
What the Supreme Court is saying is this: THE RIGHT must
still be lawfully exercisable even if the citizen does not
comply with the alleged "law".
Rights are not dependent upon laws to be exercised
in a lawful manner.
Under the First Amendment RIGHT of redress, if you
don't have a "drivers' license" and there is no
public transportation to take you to the seat of
government, how do you exercise this right minus the
"privilege" of controlling your own mechanical locomotion
to the seat of government?
What you are restricted to phone calls or mail to
the seat of government?
"Conferred a political right or privilege"
Is not the right of travel one of these?
YICK WO v. HOPKINS, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)
at page 370, 371........................
Though not regarded strictly as a natural right, but as a privilege
merely conceded by society, according to its will, under certain
conditions, nevertheless it is regarded as a fundamental political right,
because preservative of all rights. In reference to that right, it was
declared by the supreme judicial court of Massachusetts, in Capen v.
Foster, [ 29 Mass ]12 Pick. 485, 488, in the words of Chief Justice SHAW,
'that in all [118 U.S. 356, 371]
cases where the constitution has conferred a political right or
privilege, and where the constitution has not particularly designated the
manner in which that right is to be exercised, it is clearly within the
just and constitutional limits of the legislative power to adopt any
reasonable and uniform regulations, in regard to the time and mode of
exercising that right, which are designed to secure and facilitate the
exercise of such right in a prompt, orderly, and convenient manner;'
nevertheless, 'such a construction would afford no warrant for such an
exercise of legislative power as, under the pretense and color of
regulating, should subvert or injuriously restrain, the right itself.'
At 07:47 PM 2/28/07 -0800, you wrote:
My friend and I were talking about a bill that he had just voted on
regarding teenage drivers. He is a Oklahoma State
Representative. I asked why he voted the way he did, because it did
not make sense to be voting on a bill regarding 16 year old drivers on
commercial issues. You can't drive commercially until 18 years of
age. He replied: "What are you talking about." I
said: "You are not required to have a drivers license in Oklahoma
unless it is for commercial purposes." He then corrected me
and said I was wrong. I asked
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer.
We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.