One interesting characteristic of Prof. Green's discourse is that he increasingly clarifies and concretizes as he goes along. If you don't understand it at first, you will. Listening to him, we might also hope the Privileges or Immunities clause would take increasing influence -- as it was originally intended to do. The use of the Equal Protection clause, while attractive, actually seems not to provide the studiest basis for key issues in our society, namely protection from violence and freedom from "laws" that destroy our Constitutional rights.
I am a victim of a fraudulent Unlawful detainer perpetrated by my landlord who failed to submit rental debt then used as a means to evict me while myself and landlord had been participating with covid-19 rental assistance for 8-months prior to this action. She was also paid for pat of 3-day notice the day after I was physically removed from my home. In a state that has looked the other way on more than 5 million undocumented aliens in our communities. I am politically and financially disenfranchised by the State of California or California however it needs to be conveyed. my property, my job, and my home taken from me without a trial. regardless the ruling was and is against the law. I direct opposition to the intent of the legislature during a global pandemic to prevent further cases of covid by keeping the public housed. I was left for dead in the street of the greatest nation this world has ever seen. this is against the very fabric of this nation. I can jot get an attorney to help me even at 50 percent of my award. Fair employment and housing, California civil rights. nor attorney search networks nor private attorneys all denied jurisdiction even in the fact of direct instruction to go to a particular government agency. the rule of law is broken, and our way of life is slipping dangerously toward the wild, wild west! in that case I got this but until then I keep loading ammo! I am mad as hell I will get a remedy in one way or the wild west way!
not taken for granted, rather, haunting since 1873 Good summary of the reality. But to correct course after 150 years??? Serious question - would the analysis for a "privilege or immunity" be much different than the "stand-in" substantive due process analysis?
Instead of double talk: try emphasizing the difference between Right and privilege. Or better yet grow up and learn to read English with comprehension, and fix the dysfunctional criminal justice system that operates multitiered much worse than the service desk at Walmart. Point is; hunter in prison yet?
Never, ever confuse a Right with privilege. The Second Amendment is about a Right and not a privilege. Too many illiterate professors espouse that both are synonymous. The Supreme law enumerated the Right of the Second Amendment. No state or federal government has the keep and bear right, and further all gun control laws are illegal. There is even a clause in the US Constitution to remove judges for bad behavior. The ctiminal justice system in the USA operates at a worse level than the service desk at Walmart.
@alexandrasunshine1387 Great question Alexandra, and Thank you. Article 3 section 1. Please never use political notions about exact literal interpretations as limiting the scope of a living document. Use the Supremacy clause as an example. Article 3 section1 talks about the retention of public office during good behavior. So you are going to have to step up to the plate to expound correctly what bad behavior might entail. Also USC 242 the "Color of Law" suggests jail time for yes even judges.
@@douglasbockman2772 Thank you for your reply! Yes, I was familiar with the text of that judges should hold office during good behavior, and my initial question was based upon of your statement of "removal", which is what I was not aware of. What do you mean by "political notions about exact literal interpretations as limiting the scope of a living document"? I have been looking deep into the federal constitution and e.g. the 11th amendment does NOT prohibit citizen to sue their own state (or grant states immunity) YET the judicial branch at the time has for some bizarre reason concluded in Hans vs Lousiana that it does, and now this "doctrine" has been upheld as it were supreme to the constitution. So, here, the literal interpretation would be useful. Same for the second amendment...no?
@@douglasbockman2772 Not sure, lol...I have been reading the constitution and the more I do, the more shocked I get (at how it is being treated). Where in there did the people grant to the government the power to grant itself immunity after willful infringement on the people's rights?
![Where Did the Founding Fathers Get Ideas About the Structure of the Constitution? [No. 86 LECTURE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SCMAQVNlVAM/mqdefault.jpg)
![PART I - Constitutional Battles [No. 86 LECTURE]](/img/n.gif)
What an incredible breakdown of P&I & Due Process. Green is an absolute genius.
One interesting characteristic of Prof. Green's discourse is that he increasingly clarifies and concretizes as he goes along. If you don't understand it at first, you will. Listening to him, we might also hope the Privileges or Immunities clause would take increasing influence -- as it was originally intended to do. The use of the Equal Protection clause, while attractive, actually seems not to provide the studiest basis for key issues in our society, namely protection from violence and freedom from "laws" that destroy our Constitutional rights.
I am a victim of a fraudulent Unlawful detainer perpetrated by my landlord who failed to submit rental debt then used as a means to evict me while myself and landlord had been participating with covid-19 rental assistance for 8-months prior to this action. She was also paid for pat of 3-day notice the day after I was physically removed from my home. In a state that has looked the other way on more than 5 million undocumented aliens in our communities. I am politically and financially disenfranchised by the State of California or California however it needs to be conveyed. my property, my job, and my home taken from me without a trial.
regardless the ruling was and is against the law. I direct opposition to the intent of the legislature during a global pandemic to prevent further cases of covid by keeping the public housed.
I was left for dead in the street of the greatest nation this world has ever seen.
this is against the very fabric of this nation.
I can jot get an attorney to help me even at 50 percent of my award.
Fair employment and housing, California civil rights. nor attorney search networks nor private attorneys all denied jurisdiction even in the fact of direct instruction to go to a particular government agency.
the rule of law is broken, and our way of life is slipping dangerously toward the wild, wild west! in that case I got this but until then I keep loading ammo!
I am mad as hell I will get a remedy in one way or the wild west way!
not taken for granted, rather, haunting since 1873
Good summary of the reality. But to correct course after 150 years???
Serious question - would the analysis for a "privilege or immunity" be much different than the "stand-in" substantive due process analysis?
🚩
Instead of double talk: try emphasizing the difference between Right and privilege. Or better yet grow up and learn to read English with comprehension, and fix the dysfunctional criminal justice system that operates multitiered much worse than the service desk at Walmart. Point is; hunter in prison yet?
Never, ever confuse a Right with privilege. The Second Amendment is about a Right and not a privilege. Too many illiterate professors espouse that both are synonymous. The Supreme law enumerated the Right of the Second Amendment. No state or federal government has the keep and bear right, and further all gun control laws are illegal. There is even a clause in the US Constitution to remove judges for bad behavior. The ctiminal justice system in the USA operates at a worse level than the service desk at Walmart.
Can you point to where the Constitution says to remove judges for bad behavior?
@alexandrasunshine1387 Great question Alexandra, and Thank you. Article 3 section 1. Please never use political notions about exact literal interpretations as limiting the scope of a living document. Use the Supremacy clause as an example. Article 3 section1 talks about the retention of public office during good behavior. So you are going to have to step up to the plate to expound correctly what bad behavior might entail. Also USC 242 the "Color of Law" suggests jail time for yes even judges.
@alexandrasunshine1387 get your Constitution lesson yet?
@@douglasbockman2772 Thank you for your reply! Yes, I was familiar with the text of that judges should hold office during good behavior, and my initial question was based upon of your statement of "removal", which is what I was not aware of. What do you mean by "political notions about exact literal interpretations as limiting the scope of a living document"?
I have been looking deep into the federal constitution and e.g. the 11th amendment does NOT prohibit citizen to sue their own state (or grant states immunity) YET the judicial branch at the time has for some bizarre reason concluded in Hans vs Lousiana that it does, and now this "doctrine" has been upheld as it were supreme to the constitution. So, here, the literal interpretation would be useful. Same for the second amendment...no?
@@douglasbockman2772 Not sure, lol...I have been reading the constitution and the more I do, the more shocked I get (at how it is being treated). Where in there did the people grant to the government the power to grant itself immunity after willful infringement on the people's rights?
what a joke