CalWatch: The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take on a 15-year-old case challenging California’s asset seizure practices.
The issue here comes down to the 14th, is the state legislature exercising its power without making due process available to the individual. No, say the Supremes.
Due process is a funny, it is a restriction on state power:
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on July 9, 1868, and granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” which included former slaves recently freed. In addition, it forbids states from denying any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law" or to "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” By directly mentioning the role of the states, the 14th Amendment greatly expanded the protection of civil rights to all Americans and is cited in more litigation than any other amendment.
Sotomayor's appellate ruling, if she wanted to make one, was that due process has already been guaranteed by individual rights, the 14th is superfluous, say many. But due process has power, it means that state voters, under democracy, are prohibited from voting away rights in a block grant, so to speak. That is, every state law now has an implicit clause which says: mechanisms to insure step by step rights are guaranteed within this law.
How would I have ruled? Dunno, it is still a tough rule, because the individual has to show up to exercise a right, but he has no duty to do so. So we have this gray area where the state is held in limbo, a restriction on fundamental states power. How do we do gray areas? Voters have to understand the implications of their vote, especially gray areas.
No comments:
Post a Comment