Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kontron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!nsc!voder!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Drugs in America (Constitution quoted)
Message-ID: <543@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Feb-86 12:22:09 EST
Article-I.D.: kontron.543
Posted: Fri Feb 28 12:22:09 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Mar-86 00:06:50 EST
References: <2607@sdcrdcf.UUCP> <413@packard.UUCP> <524@kontron.UUCP> <521@ho95e.UUCP>
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Irvine, CA
Lines: 59

> > > However, on the issue of drug testing I agree. The police cannot
> > > search your home or your car unless they can show just cause;
> > > so allowing an employer, or any other agency to search my body or
> > > mind without just cause is unconstitutional. 
> > > 
> > 
> > There seems to be a big misunderstanding about what the Bill of Rights
> > controls.  The Bill of Rights is a set of restrictions on the Federal
> > Government's power; the Fourteenth Amendment extends those protections
> > (well, most of them -- the courts are a little inconsistent in this
> > area) to restrict the States and their subsidiary governments.  The
> > Bill of Rights was NEVER intended to restrict or control private
> > entities, because in the view of the Founding Fathers (and myself), 
> > only the government has the monopolistic power to abuse us so severely
> > that restrictions needed to be part of the Constitution.
> ---
> 
> Amendment I
> 
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
> or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
> speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
> assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
> 
> 
> Amendment IV
> 
> The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
> and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
> violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
> by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched,
> and the persons and things to be seized.
> 
> ---
> 
> Notice that when Congress is prohibited from doing something, then
> the Amendments clearly say "Congress".  As I read the 4th amendment,
> it says people are secure in their persons, etc. PERIOD!  This is clearly
> a general prohibition on anybody, not just the government.
> 
> 
> PS.  I realize that it doesn't matter what the Constitution says,
> it's what 9 old people say it says.  But it sure looks pretty clear to me.
> -- 
> 
> ". . . and shun the frumious Bandersnatch."
> Robert Neinast (ihnp4!ho95c!ran)
> AT&T-Bell Labs

Yes, but the PURPOSE of the Bill of Rights was to establish protections for
the people and the states from Federal intrusion.  The PURPOSE of the 14th
Amendment was to establish protections for the people from State and local
governments.  The text alone is not the only issue in determining the intent
of the Founding Fathers -- this is why the original debates on particular
amendments to the Constitution are relevant to do.

Without the historical background, it is easy to become a strict 
constructionist.  A strict constructionist is to the Constitution as a
fundamentalist is to the Bible.