The Constitution isn't "constitutional." I mean, of course it is, but the Constitution itself doesn't live up to its pretense. More specifically, there is a fundamental (legal) disconnect between the flowery words of the DoI (the "spirit"), and the Constitution (the actual law).
As to whether or not this law is constitutional, that really doesn't have anything to do with the Constitution itself, but on whether or not the Supreme court determines it to be so. The Supreme Court has the Ultimate Authority in defining the Constitution, not the Constitution itself. That is only one of its fundamental flaws from which all method of legal fuckery emerges.
I think the question is it constitutional
The Constitution isn't "constitutional." I mean, of course it is, but the Constitution itself doesn't live up to its pretense. More specifically, there is a fundamental (legal) disconnect between the flowery words of the DoI (the "spirit"), and the Constitution (the actual law).
As to whether or not this law is constitutional, that really doesn't have anything to do with the Constitution itself, but on whether or not the Supreme court determines it to be so. The Supreme Court has the Ultimate Authority in defining the Constitution, not the Constitution itself. That is only one of its fundamental flaws from which all method of legal fuckery emerges.