Response from Rep. Santarsiero on HR 95

[ThoughtCriminal]

Dear ThoughtCriminal:



Thank you for your email regarding House Resolution 95, claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, being offered by Representative Sam Rohrer. Please forgive my delay in responding.



As you may now know, I do not support House Resolution 95. Ever since the Marbury v. Madison decision of 1803, it has been accepted that the United States Supreme Court, not the state legislatures or the Congress, is the arbiter of constitutionality.



Thank you again for your correspondence regarding House Resolution 95. If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.



Sincerely,



Steve Santarsiero

State Representative

31st Legislative District

[Decholder]

As you may now know, I do not support House Resolution 95. Ever since the Marbury v. Madison decision of 1803, it has been accepted that the United States Supreme Court, not the state legislatures or the Congress, is the arbiter of constitutionality.

Hmmm......That's funny, I thought that the standard for determining the "constitutionality" of something was in fact the Constitution, not the supreme court....But I guess history and literal interpretation of the Constitution are things of the past.