Tuesday, August 30, 2016

Constitutional Limitations

We don't have Constitutional Rights. We have rights. The Constitution lists (enumerates) a few of them and then says in Amendment 9:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
The government does not have rights, it has powers. Those powers were agreed on and outlined in the Constitution. The followup is in Amendment 10:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
Individual rights are open-ended and unlimited. Governmental powers are defined and limited. Today's discussion is about the right of free speech and, by extension, free expression.

Colin Kaepernick. a man who has a six year $114 million contract to provide entertainment in the form of sports, has decided that he and people of a group he self-identifies with are being oppressed by the United States of America. His response to this is to sit down during the playing of the National Anthem and talk about that sitting down as much as possible. I completely support his right to do this. Even if I didn't, he would still have the right.

The government, as I understand it, is unconcerned. His rights to free speech and free expression are untrammeled. He can sit during the Anthem without fear of arrest or government coercion, but that's as far as his rights in the matter go. There's nothing in the Constitution that says that you or I have to support the NFL or watch a game.

I have rights, as do you. It is my right to boycott the National Football League, their games, products and sponsors. I don't have to sit and watch Mr. Kaepernick sit. The NFL can find someone else that wants to make a hundred million dollars and is proud of the country if they want to. Or not.


Borepatch said...

Kaepernick may very well have been about to be cut, because he's not a very good player despite the $120M contract. Half of this wasn't guaranteed money - and thus the desire on the part of the owner to cut him.

That's all very likely on hold now. I have to hand it to Kaepernick - he may have figured out how to screw the 49ers out of $60M by making himself too controversial to fire, since he's now a darling of the Left.

burt said...

I don't think that being a "darling of the left" will protect you, even in the NFL.

(see: Michael Sam)

Old NFO said...

Excellent points sir, thanks!

Anonymous said...

Excuse me, sir - what is this "NFL" of which you speak?