Best Supreme Court ruling

[J. J.]

Pollock vs Farmers' Loan and Trust Company

Correct, but superseded.

[J. J.]

What constitutional amendment superseded it?

And States, what constitutional amendments do you recognize?

The 16th is the main one I have the most problems with. As I believe it was not properly ratified.

http://political-resources.com/taxes/16thamendment/default.htm

Their are dozens of pages on the subject but I don't feel like linking them all.

**This is a good one as well http://www.rense.com/general/abreaktax.htm

No, not even close.  The "errors" are not substantive.

Here is the actual list:

Alabama, August 10, 1909; Kentucky, February 8, 1910; South Carolina, February 19, 1910; Illinois, March 1, 1910; Mississippi, March 7, 1910; Oklahoma, March 10, 1910; Maryland, April 8, 1910; Georgia, August 3, 1910; Texas, August 16, 1910; Ohio, January 19, 1911; Idaho, January 20, 1911; Oregon, January 23, 1911; Washington, January 26, 1911; Montana, January 30, 1911; Indiana, January 30, 1911; California, January 31, 1911; Nevada, January 31, 1911; South Dakota, February 3, 1911; Nebraska, February 9, 1911; North Carolina, February 11, 1911; Colorado, February 15, 1911; North Dakota, February 17, 1911; Kansas, February 18, 1911; Michigan, February 23, 1911; Iowa, February 24, 1911; Missouri, March 16, 1911; Maine, March 31, 1911; Tennessee, April 7, 1911; Arkansas, April 22, 1911 (after having rejected it earlier); Wisconsin, May 26, 1911; New York, July 12, 1911; Arizona, April 6, 1912; Minnesota, June 11, 1912; Louisiana, June 28, 1912; West Virginia, January 31, 1913; New Mexico, February 3, 1913.

Ratification was completed on February 3, 1913.

The amendment was subsequently ratified by Massachusetts, March 4, 1913; New Hampshire, March 7, 1913 (after having rejected it on March 2, 1911).

http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDERAL/usconst/amend.html

[J. J.]

Most (if not all) of the rulings cited in earlier postings on this thread would not have existed without Marbury v. Madison (1803). That ruling define the SCOTUS' ability to curtail government by declaring acts of Congress or the President unconstitutional. I don't always agree with where that power has led, but I appreciate having the additional check on the other branches.

I have to agree, but M'Culluch v. Maryland would be close.  If you are going to have a national government, a strong government, you do have to limit the state's role in interfering with it.

[J. J.]

I don't care about state's rights if the right is to pass g idiotic and asinine laws. that's one right states shouldn't have.

Would you point to the section of the Constitution that says a state is prohibited from adopting "g idiotic and asinine laws."  Even though I disagree with this statute, I recognize the right of a state to adopt a law that I regard as moronic.

As Peter Bell pointed out, there are other grounds.