And as further evidence that the conclusion we reach is but the inevitable consequence of the provisions of the Constitution as effect follows cause, we briefly recur to events in another environment. The seceding states wrote into the Constitution which was adopted to regulate the government which they sought to establish, in identical words the provisions of the Constitution of the United States which we here have under consideration. And when the right to enforce under that instrument a selective draft law which was enacted not differing in principle from the one here in question was challenged, its validity was upheld evidently after great consideration by the courts of Virginia, of Georgia, of Texas, of Alabama, of Mississippi and of North Carolina, the opinions in some of the cases copiously and critically reviewing the whole grounds which we have stated. Burroughs v. Peyton, 16 Grat. (Va.) 470; Jeffers v. Fair, 33 Ga. 347; Daly and Fitzgerald v. Harris, 33 Ga. Supp. 38, 54; Barber v. Irwin, 34 Ga. 27; Parker v. Kaughman, 34 Ga. 136; Ex parte Coupland, 26 Tex. 386; Ex parte Hill, 38 Ala. 429; In re Emerson, 39 Ala. 437; In re Pille, 39 Ala. 459; Simmons v. Miller, 40 Miss. 19; Gatlin v. Walton, 60 N. C. 333, 408.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
- delegated federal power to state officials;
- delegated legislative power to executive officials; and
- delegated judicial power to executive officials.
Finally, as we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement.
- whether or not service is provided;
- whether or not that service is voluntary; and
- whether or not that service is required as punishment for a crime after due process of law.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.The honest legal argument behind the "an individual mandate threatens our liberties!" argument would claim that the imposition of a mandate takes away our liberty without due process of law.
- The first ADA to try 10 DWI (driving while intoxicated) jury trials will get to sit second chair on a vehicular manslaughter or murder case.
- The first ADA to try 12 jury trials with at least a 50% win record will get to sit second chair on a murder case.
- Any "court" (group of prosecutors who are responsible for a certain courtroom) to complete three jury trials in a single week gets to leave work early the next Friday.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
On the most recent nationwide science test, about a third of fourth graders and a fifth of high school seniors scored at or above the proficiency level, according to results released Tuesday.
Because the Education Department changed the test since it was last administered in 2005, the latest results cannot be used to determine whether science achievement has risen or declined in recent years.
But the results showed that a smaller proportion of 12th graders demonstrated proficiency in science than in any other subject that the government has tested since 2005 — except history.
Twenty-one percent of the nation’s 12th graders scored at or above the proficient level in science on the 2009 tests, compared with 42 percent who demonstrated proficiency on the most recent economics exam, and 38 percent and 26 percent, respectively, on the most recent nationwide reading and math tests.
In other words, less students reached an arbitrary "proficiency" level in one subject than reached a different arbitrary "proficiency" level in another subject. So...what, exactly?
The data shows us how many students reached the given arbitrary level. It doesn't show us how many are "proficient" in a meaningful sense of the word, and it certainly doesn't provide for accurate comparisons with other fields.
The study examines two categories in federal spending: constituency services, which is generally quantified by how much money the congressperson is able to bring back to their district, and how many bills were sponsored by women versus men.The study apparently finds that even when controlling for other factors, female politicians tend to bring more money home and sponsor more bills (which are better received by the public). But none of those things, even public reception of sponsored bills, is necessarily the mark of a "good" legislator.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Here at RedState I always hesitate before I praise a proposal by a Democrat. This is a site committed to achieving conservative aims through the Republican party, and I agree with that commitment. But once in a while, on issues less politically charged, a Democrat will come up with something reasonable. This is one of those times.