Let Me Get This Straight On The No-Call List

[Don_G]

If the Senate and Congress both passed the bill in record time, then by what right does a Federal Judge have to block the passage of a law barring telemarkerters from calling you when over two-thirds of the states have passed no-call lists on their own.

Front up and flat out and by figures provided by the Direct Marketing Asociation, 31 states have laws on the books preventing annoying calls with another two joining that battle in 2004...was that not similar to the same percentage of the population to defeat and repeal the 18th Amendment?

Link: http://www.the-dma.org/government/donotcalllists.shtml

[Occulus]

1. By the 'right' of corporate personhood

see Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, USSC. Go to findlaw; sorry, can't provide a link at the moment.

Try a google search for several starting points on this issue.

[Don_G]

2. Corporate "Personhood" vs The Will And Rights As A Nation?

...when the majority of a people in 50 seperate areas acted alone and in their best interests to elect "not to be bothered...." two-thirds of the time?

No, Dimbo can holler all he can but this is another thinly-disguised attempt to unify the nation under one corporation/game/reality show to the "world."

He lives in pampered and dipered fantasy; you and I don't.

[Mortensen]

7. The Will And Rights As A Nation

Great idea. Then why can amend the Constitution to say "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances... unless you're talking on the telephone."

That won't cause problems at all.

[Gore1FL]

3. Obnoxious and disturbing calls are not freedom of speech

If so, everytime I hang up on someone I am violating the first amendment.

The judge is an idiot.

[bluestateguy]

4. A "no-call" amendment to the Constitution?

That would seem to be taking things a little overboard. At the end of the day, I see more states passing "no-call" lists if it really looks like the national list is a dead deal.

[cid]

5. From what I read the reason it violates the 1st Amendment

is because polititians, charities etc can still call you, just not telemarketers..if they made the do not call list to include charities etc, then it wouldnt be a problem.

[Democat]

6. The Constitution comes before the Senate or House, thank god!

While I might not agree with the judge, I do agree that the constitution must always come before any law supported by the Senate or House.

Without the constitution, imagine how many worse things Bush and Ashcroft would have done to this country.

[izzie]

8. No law can be a law if it does not pass the constitution

But then congress has handed over its power to make war so maybe that paper is not working anymore.That is to be the finally word in law. Even over the states as we had a war to see if we ment it.