Jump to content
steveg1963

Constitutional _ Florida Amendment 13

9 posts in this topic

I did not see any other place to put this.  We are a PAC that opposed the ban on greyhound racing in Florida.  We believe not only is the amendment itself Unconstitutional but the path to the ballot could be considered election fraud.  The taking of a legal profession would seem to violate the 5th and 14th Amendments.  We are looking for a Constitutional Lawyer to challenge this in Federal Court.  If you are interested, please contact myself steve@overturn13.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a forum where solicitation of lawyers is permitted.  However, I question your reasoning.  Prohibiting dog racing does not constitute the "taking of a legal profession."  All forms of using animals for "sport" are regulated and, in some cases, prohibited.  Horse racing, for instance, is tightly regulated.  Cock and dog fighting, on the other hand, are prohibited in most states.  I don't see why the use of dogs in a specified way cannot be regulated or prohibited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, steveg1963 said:

 The taking of a legal profession would seem to violate the 5th and 14th Amendments.  

 

A ban on greyhound racing is not a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Many other states have such bans, and there has been no question that those bans are constitutional. Your reasoning seems to be that an activity that is currently legal can never be banned under the Constitution, and that logic is flawed. If that were the case then no activity that was legal when the constitution was established could be made illegal, and we know that it clearly not true. You only need to look at the prohibition on the sale of illegal drugs to see that. When the country was founded, there were no laws banning the sale or use of marijuana, cocaine, meth, LSD, or any other drugs that the government has banned. Those prohibitions came later, and yet there is no doubt they are Constitutional. I think your group needs to look at alternatives other than a federal constitutional challenge. All that the constitutional challenge will do for you is cost your group a lot of money that will in the end not succeed in getting back the greyhound racing you want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No sir the Constitution protects the right of people to work and not have their LEGAL profession taken away,  you just assumed the argument was racing.  No offense but we have a Constitutional lawyer that agrees with us, we are looking for someone close to home to cut down travel expenses..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RetiredinVA said:

This is not a forum where solicitation of lawyers is permitted.  However, I question your reasoning.  Prohibiting dog racing does not constitute the "taking of a legal profession."  All forms of using animals for "sport" are regulated and, in some cases, prohibited.  Horse racing, for instance, is tightly regulated.  Cock and dog fighting, on the other hand, are prohibited in most states.  I don't see why the use of dogs in a specified way cannot be regulated or prohibited.

I apologize then, we are looking for referrals, I will delete the post.  The FL Bar is worthless as they are anti racing and their animal defense section backed AM13 by telling the same lies that the animal activists propagated with their millions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RetiredinVA said:

This is not a forum where solicitation of lawyers is permitted.  However, I question your reasoning.  Prohibiting dog racing does not constitute the "taking of a legal profession."  All forms of using animals for "sport" are regulated and, in some cases, prohibited.  Horse racing, for instance, is tightly regulated.  Cock and dog fighting, on the other hand, are prohibited in most states.  I don't see why the use of dogs in a specified way cannot be regulated or prohibited.

So what do you call the generations that have made their income from that industry?  They are different then you how? Should we ban lawyers because people do not like your profession?  What about doctors? Stockbrokers? Dairy Farmers? Citrus farmers? Chicken farms / egg farms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, steveg1963 said:

No sir the Constitution protects the right of people to work and not have their LEGAL profession taken away,  you just assumed the argument was racing.  No offense but we have a Constitutional lawyer that agrees with us, we are looking for someone close to home to cut down travel expenses..

 

They didn't take away a legal profession. They made it illegal. Feel free to point out where the Constitution doesn't allow that.

 

Every lawyer you are looking for is going to be a member of the Bar. If you think the Bar Association isn't going to help you, don't tell them the specific reason you need a constitutional lawyer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, steveg1963 said:

The taking of a legal profession would seem to violate the 5th and 14th Amendments.

 

No portion of either of those amendments addresses the "taking of a legal profession" (which I assume means criminalizing a "profession" that was previously legal).  If you think otherwise, please explain why you think that.

 

The only thing remotely close would be that portion of the 5th Amendment that provides as follows:  "No person shall be . . . deprived of . . . property, without due process of law" (as well as the similar provision in the 14th Amendment).

 

However, a ban against greyhound racing would not deprive anyone of property.  Owners of greyhounds may continue to own them, and the Supreme Court has held that the fact that a law prevents "the most profitable use of [one's] property" does not violate the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment because "a reduction in the value of property is not necessarily equated with a taking."  Andrus v. Allard, 444 U.S. 51, 66 (1979).

 

 

2 hours ago, steveg1963 said:

We are looking for a Constitutional Lawyer to challenge this in Federal Court.  If you are interested, please contact myself

 

With the possible exception of spammers and crackpots, no one is going to e-mail you based on a message board post.

 

 

1 hour ago, steveg1963 said:

the Constitution protects the right of people to work and not have their LEGAL profession taken away

 

It is certainly true that some provisions of the Constitution protect workers' rights in certain circumstances, but no provision of the U.S. (or Florida) Constitution provides a generalized "right . . . not [to] have [one's] LEGAL profession taken away."

 

It's very easy to make statements like "the Constitution protects such-and-such."  Actually backing up those statements with actual constitutional text and case law is quite another.

 

 

1 hour ago, steveg1963 said:

we have a Constitutional lawyer that agrees with us, we are looking for someone close to home to cut down travel expenses.

 

That one single lawyer agrees with you is, by itself, meaningless, but I understand that you will naturally assume that anyone who agrees with you is right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.

 

Also, to the best of my knowledge, no lawyers from Florida follow these boards regularly.  If I were you, I would contact whatever horse racing associations exist in Florida and ask for the names of lawyers they have used.

 

 

1 hour ago, steveg1963 said:

So what do you call the generations that have made their income from that industry?

 

I don't really understand your question or why you chose to ask this question in response to what "RetiredinVA" wrote.  Nonetheless, in the interest of answering your question, I would call them generations that have made their income from that industry.

 

 

1 hour ago, steveg1963 said:

They are different then you how? Should we ban lawyers because people do not like your profession?  What about doctors? Stockbrokers? Dairy Farmers? Citrus farmers? Chicken farms / egg farms?

 

If you really want your arguments to have any weight, you should avoid silly, argumentative statements like these.  "RetiredinVA" merely pointed out -- correctly -- that industries that use animals for sport have long been tightly regulated.  While I can't say I'm intimately familiar with such laws, I'd be shocked if Florida didn't have a whole bunch of law in place that regulated the greyhound racing industry prior to banning it outright.  There are certainly tons of laws that regulate lawyers, doctors, stockbrokers and farmers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×