12-30-2009, 06:34 PM
LOL... yeah thanks Carey, I know what it means.
The notion of congress to treat all citizens equally; that’s truly a laughable assumption.
If that were the case, it's under the wrong article and would have been placed somewhere under article 1… congress.
The second assumption would be fine but the clause mentions nothing about travel from one state to another nor about retention of those privileges/immunities therein within travel.
The only thing that addresses movement in section 2 amongst states is the second paragraph and that deals with extradition and being delivered up.
This is under article 4; the states. Not Congress.
As per its meaning according to the Supreme Court as limitedly cited through Wiki, it would be applicable visa vas also and it well demonstrates how all rights would also be considered equally honored and practiced amongst the several states. Rights are inherently greater than the subordinate appropriated privileges and immunities…
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
The notion of congress to treat all citizens equally; that’s truly a laughable assumption.
If that were the case, it's under the wrong article and would have been placed somewhere under article 1… congress.
The second assumption would be fine but the clause mentions nothing about travel from one state to another nor about retention of those privileges/immunities therein within travel.
The only thing that addresses movement in section 2 amongst states is the second paragraph and that deals with extradition and being delivered up.
This is under article 4; the states. Not Congress.
As per its meaning according to the Supreme Court as limitedly cited through Wiki, it would be applicable visa vas also and it well demonstrates how all rights would also be considered equally honored and practiced amongst the several states. Rights are inherently greater than the subordinate appropriated privileges and immunities…
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.