Warp wrote:
> Gail Shaw <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:
>> If you want really messed up, try South Africa.
> 
>> It is illegal, forbidden by our constitution, to discriminate against anyone
>> on the basis of skin colour, gender, religion, sexual preference or
>> nationality.
>> It is a requirement of the labour law that all companies employing more than
>> 50 people, have an affirmative action employment policy, whereby jobs are
>> given by preference to 'previously disadvantaged individuals'
> 
>   It sounds a bit like the constitution of Finland: A lot of nice words
> which mean absolutely nothing in practice.
> 
>   (Unlike in the US (if I'm not mistaken), the constitution in Finland is
> not an actual law. You can't "break" the constitution. Criminal law has
> no concept of "breaking the constitution", and no sentences are ever given
> for doing something unconstitutional. Unlike in the US, constitution is not
> really something you can plead to (eg. you don't "plead the fifth" or
> anything like that here).
>   In theory the constitution limits what can be passed as law, but in
> practice many laws go against the constitution. OTOH, the constitution
> doesn't prohibit that, as its wording is basically "this is allowed unless
> prohibited by a law". Of course this is an absolute null statement.)
> 

No one 'breaks' the constitution of the USA.

All it sets out, initially, is what each part of the government is 
allowed to do and how they can accomplish it. Congress is consisted of 
these people and does this stuff in this manner, while the President is 
this person who is elected somehow and can do this other stuff.

The first 10 amendments to the constitution actually went further, and 
forbid certain kinds of laws from being created. Again, though, the 
Congress and President do not 'break' the constitution by making laws 
like that, because they simply lack the authority to. The law gets 
enforced, someone appeals, the Supreme Court rules the law 
unconstitutional, and the law goes away.*

The fun parts are the 10th amendment, that said any power not given to 
the Federal government and not forbidden to the states are reserved to 
the State, and the 14th amendment, which made everyone born in the USA a 
citizen and guaranteed them the same rights.  Why? Well, the 10th is 
skirted by calling just about anything 'interstate commerce'. Grow grain 
to feed your own farm animals? Congress can regulate that, because the 
grain you might be buying could come from other states. The other way is 
to remove federal funding from states that do not enact certain laws: 
"Do this or your tax dollars go some place else." And while the 14th 
says that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge 
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."** it has 
been used to push other laws on the States. Whether that's a good or bad 
thing depends on if you see the country as the USA or at the United 
States of America. It is far from clear, either way.


*that's the way it's supposed to work, anyways.
**"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the 
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any 
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due 
process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal 
protection of the laws."

Post a reply to this message