News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts. Parent comment

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by tines on Monday July 01, 2024 @07:07PM (#40851800)
> Not only that, but this same court removed the constitutional right to an abortion because it wasn't enumerated in the Constitution.

I'm as against this court as the next guy, but don't constitutional rights need to be, you know, in the constitution?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by brewdad on Monday July 01, 2024 @08:39PM (#40852427)
Some rights, such as bodily autonomy, are so self-evident the Founders didn’t feel the need to enumerate them.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by bane on Monday July 01, 2024 @08:48PM (#40852482)
No, the 9th recognizes that the Constitution doesn't capture every possible right in its enumeration.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by i-am-fnord on Monday July 01, 2024 @09:07PM (#40852607)
No, because rights are not granted by the constitution, rights are self-evident and natural, and people retain them without them being explicitly enumerated.

The constitution merely enumerates certain rights where the founders wanted to be extra clear that those things were rights, but it is not a limiting document.

The 9th amendment states this explicitly: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by tines on Monday July 01, 2024 @09:19PM (#40852661)
Gotcha. So how do we know what rights we have for sure?
[ Parent | on HN ]