Suppose Congress (or all the state legislatures) were to enact a law similar to China's one child policy, that made it illegal for a woman to have more than one child. Please don't tell me why this won't happen, or whether it would be a good idea or not. My question is whether such a law would be constitutional. And if you say it would be unconstitutional, please cite the provision of the US Constitution that such a law would violate.
2007-11-12 10:04:09 · 14 answers · asked by rollo_tomassi423 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yes, it would violate a womans right to privacy granted in the roe v. wade case.
2007-11-12 10:07:13 · answer #1 · answered by Kimber 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Your question indicates that you do not understand what the the Constitution is. The Constitution is not intended to be a document outlining our rights (although the Bill of Rights was added as a protection measure) but, rather, a document limiting the power and authority of a Federal Government. The question isn't what provision of the Constitution the law would violate. Rather the quesion is what provision in the Constitution grants the Government the authority to do that. The answer is... none. And the Constitution CLEARLY states that any right not SPECIFICALLY granted to the Federal Government by the Constitution belongs to the States individually and to the people as individuals. Of course today the Federal Government regularly ignores this caveat with impunity... but that doesn't alter the document.
2007-11-12 10:30:46 · answer #2 · answered by capt_sheffield 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's not expressly forbidden, but the Ninth amendment forces the government to recognize human rights that aren't already listed in the Constitution- that alone would probably get the case into the Supreme Court, if congress and the President suddenly felt suicidal enough to somehow pass such a law.
2007-11-12 10:14:26 · answer #3 · answered by Beardog 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i do no longer see the two the 1st or 4th being violated from the advice you presented, besides except you opt for for to sue you're surprisingly plenty sol. Get evidence which you talked approximately as the police, there must be an incident record the two way, get it. Get your son to swear he observed them removing very own belongings out of your premisis, get the thieving officers call and sue him no longer the police. positioned a advertisement lien on any belongings he owns till he resolves the concern, examine up on advertisement liens, pay attention study the technique intently or you're able to desire to get your self in concern, sturdy luck. i does no longer call it siezed belongings, i'd call it stolen, pass to the legal expert well-known and report theft over one hundred money against the officer. Worse case situation seek for suggestion from an legal expert, yet i does no longer anticipate any of them to assist. Did the police provide you a receipt while they took your stuff? in the event that they did no longer you in all possibility won't be able to coach illegally siezed belongings, yet with a witness you're able to desire to be waiting to coach theft. sturdy luck, i comprehend the police are not truly worth having, they have in no way achieved something in my choose, ever!
2016-10-02 05:31:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1st Amendment: freedom of speech. Having a child could be considered a Speech Act.
4th Amendment: privacy. What you do in your own home is your own business. This was the same reasoning used to overturn Lawrence V. Texas last year.
2007-11-12 10:08:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Judicial Branch would name it unconstitutional and ban it under the 1st ammendment
2007-11-12 10:07:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think it would be unconstitutional and it would violate the Human Rights Law, and also I think it would violate the Human's Right to Privacy.
2007-11-12 10:14:20 · answer #7 · answered by 24Special 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The 9th Amendment.
2007-11-12 10:07:31 · answer #8 · answered by wichitaor1 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Boy that's out in left field! Granted this is Yahoo Answers, but how about a question that someone gives a damn about, because what you asked IS never going to happen in the foreseeable future, and maybe NEVER! How about real questions for what is real in THIS country?
2007-11-12 10:09:09 · answer #9 · answered by Glenn T 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Well, maybe freedom of religion. Catholics believe in as many children as possible without tearing out your hair.
2007-11-12 10:08:51 · answer #10 · answered by Madikar 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋