“Conservative” Tom Nichols With A New Hot Take On Roe For The Atlantic
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (32)
sorted by:
You partially answered your own question. Property rights cover the ability for you to camp outside someone’s home and shout at them. This is why noise ordinances are constitutional, you do not own the area you are making noise in so the ability to make noise is dictated by the landowner. The peaceful assembly clause of the first amendment is the second. Shouting is not peaceful, simply put.
That’s legally incorrect, there is no person limit to assembly. A singular person can assemble. Your right to speech is again freedom from the government to restrict your speech. The right to property is covered by a combination of the 9th and 10th amendments. This is why castle law is not universal. It does however completely invalidate his argument.
I’m claiming that the right to property is protected directly by the 9th amendment, yes. As references are made to private property across multiple constitutional rights. This is further validated by the tenth where all states have always allowed the purchase of property.
It is. If you don't have a right to property why would the constitution need to prevent the government from taking it without fue process?