3 ms·
> Also in 1798, Congress passed the Sedition Act, which violated the First Amendment. The simple fact that a Congress included many Founders does not necessaril
by throw0101c 1y ago
> Also in 1798, Congress passed the Sedition Act, which violated the First Amendment. The simple fact that a Congress included many Founders does not necessarily imply that its acts were all in compliance with the Constitution those same Founders wrote or concurred with years before.
Or they were not 'absolutists' in regards to the Constitution they themselves wrote, and understood some play / slop was needed in interpretation and implementation.
- Bluestein 1y agoReally had some top-notch statesmen back then.- ... I sometimes wonder by virtue of what happy confluence these forefathers came to be so apt, that is to say, what precise and fortunate combination of personal, professional and vital circumstances yielded such people.-
- hiatus 1y agoOr they were opportunists, and used the Federalist majority to pass legislation intended to, among other things, silence anti-Federalist publications.
- ty6853 1y agoThe federalists also intentionally slowed and interfered with the mail of anti-federalists to get an upper hand, at a time when it was crucial for their organization. Ultimately, the federalists won. The last kiss of death was circa 1930s, when you see that before you needed constitutional amendments to regulate child labor (never passed) or to federally regulate intrastate alcohol (passed), after that they just totally dispensed with any of the constitutional provisions made to the anti-federalists and just rammed it all down our throats under the guise of interstate commerce. This is why the civil rights act in the 19th century was found unconstitutional, but the mid 20th century version with many of the same provisions magically was. Or why they needed an amendment to ban alcohol, but magically did not need an amendment to pass the controlled substance act.