BA> JB> The states have been successful with state's rights on the
BA> JB> subject of  gay marriage.  It is going to prove to be a
BA> JB> very interesting process and  it may turn out that another
BA> JB> amendment will be needed.  The Supreme  Court is long
BA> JB> overdue to rule on state's rights vs. federal powers.  
BA> JB> There are many areas where the US Congress has trampled
BA> JB> state's rights.

BA>You obviously have more faith in the court system than I do.  I've
BA>been wrong before, the SC's ruling that the 2nd Amendment protects
BA>the individual right to own a firearm being one of them, I was
BA>pleasantly surprised.

BA>Of course, when you always expect the worst possible outcome you
BA>only get pleasant surprises. 

I am not saying the state's will be successful via the lawsuit approach.  
But via the legal challenge they will pose by having enacted laws within 
their state, they will be on more firm footing.  The Supreme Court will 
have a difficult time be face with whether state's rights trump the 
commerce clause, for an activity that is clearly not commerce.  It 
should be a good argument.  


Jeff

CMPQwk 1.42-21 9999 
Democrats --  The party of economic obstruction ....

--- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 10