I am not a constitutional scholar (although I suspect I may know more about it than BHO). So some of the debate that I am hearing is a little over my head.
More particularly, ?just what does “incorporatioin” mean, when referring to the constitution. MY sense is that it means that something is essential in the constitution, given to the Fed, so not usupable by states (or other government entities).
But I also understand that when the constitution was written, it was intended to be directly applicable to the fed ONLY, and that states, other than specific banned actions (making foreign treaties, taxing goods across their state line, etc.) were free to decide whatever they wished on these matters. So the Bill Of Rights is NOT incorporated, but only speaks to what the federal government can or cannot do. Thus, by way of example, the states are NOT enjoined from creating a state religion, and indeed, Massachussetts did originally, only removing it some years later.
Somehow the 14th changed all that. But I am at a loss to understand just how that happened. The 14th eradicated any discrimination by virtue of skin colour, and gave the right to vote to all. ?Where does all the rest of this nonsense come from (other than thin air).
?So is someone better versed in this than I. ?Titus – anything in your area of expertise. I understand that the SCOTUS has now pretty much decided that the whole constitution is incorporated, but then fails to hold the appropriate level of scrutiny for such things as guns.