Text[ edit ] There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with capitalization or punctuation differences. Differences exist between the drafted and ratified copies, the signed copies on display, and various published transcriptions. The hand-written copy of the proposed Bill of Rights,cropped to show only the text that would later be edited and ratified as the Second Amendment The amendment was ratified by the States and authenticated by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson as:
Text[ edit ] 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. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
I find, from looking into the amendments proposed by the State conventions, that several are particularly anxious that it should be declared in the Constitution, that the powers not therein delegated should be reserved to the several States.
Perhaps words which may define this more precisely than the whole of the instrument now does, may be considered as superfluous. I admit they may be deemed unnecessary: I am sure I understand it so, and do therefore propose it. In United States v. Sprague the Supreme Court asserted that the amendment "added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified.
An often-repeated quote, from United States v. The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered.
There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.
In Garcia, the Court noted that this analysis was "unsound in principle and unworkable in practice", and concluded that the framers believed that state sovereignty could be maintained by the political system established by the Constitution.
Noting that the same Congress that extended the FLSA to cover government-run mass transit systems also provided substantial funding for those systems, the Court concluded that the structure created by the framers had indeed protected the states from overreaching by the federal government.
In South Carolina v. Baker the Court said in dicta that an exception to Garcia would be when a state lacked "any right to participate" in the federal political process or was left "politically isolated and powerless" by a federal law.
In New York v. United States the Supreme Court invalidated a portion of a federal law for violating the Tenth Amendment. The act provided three incentives for states to comply with statutory obligations to provide for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste.
The first two incentives were monetary. The third, which was challenged in the case, obliged states to take title to any waste within their borders that was not disposed of prior to January 1,and made each state liable for all damages directly related to the waste.
The Court ruled that the imposition of that obligation on the states violated the Tenth Amendment. Dole or through the commerce power by directly pre-empting state law. However, Congress cannot directly compel states to enforce federal regulations.
The act required state and local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on people attempting to purchase handguns.
Justice Antonin Scaliawriting for the majority, applied New York v. United States to show that the act violated the Tenth Amendment. National Collegiate Athletic Association the Supreme Court ruled that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act ofwhich prohibited states that banned sports betting when the law was enacted from legalizing it, violated the anti-commandeering doctrine and invalided the entire law.
The Court ruled that the anti-commandeering doctrine applied to congressional attempts to prevent the states from taking a certain action as much as it applied in New York and Printz to Congress requiring states to enforce federal law. Hence, in the aggregate, if farmers were allowed to consume their own wheat, it would affect the interstate market in wheat.
Lopez a federal law mandating a " gun-free zone " on and around public school campuses was struck down because, the Supreme Court ruled, there was no clause in the Constitution authorizing it. Most recently, in Gonzales v.
Raich a California woman sued the Drug Enforcement Administration after her medical cannabis crop was seized and destroyed by federal agents. Medical cannabis was explicitly made legal under California state law by Propositiondespite cannabis being prohibited at the federal level by the Controlled Substances Act.
It therefore ruled that this practice may be regulated by the federal government under the authority of the Commerce Clause.Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly; Standing Armies and Armed Citizens: An Historical Analysis of The Second Amendment, by Roy G.
Weatherup. - Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists From the development of the American Constitution was a battle between two opposing political philosophies.
America’s best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the Northeast in order to find common ground in a governmental structure.
- The Federalist and Anti-Federalist. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly; Standing Armies and Armed Citizens: An Historical Analysis of The Second Amendment, by Roy G.
Weatherup. Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.. We consider whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
The District of Columbia generally prohibits the possession of handguns. The Importance of The Bill of Rights in Society Today - When the Second Constitutional Convention wrote the Constitution in , there was a controversy between the federalists and the anti-federalists surrounding whether or not to have a Bill of Rights.
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.. We consider whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution. I. The District of Columbia generally prohibits the possession of handguns.