Can someone explain how it is constitutionally acceptable to have Sunday alcohol bans?
I live in a state that still has Blue Laws and slowly more and more towns are getting rid of them, but some cities still have bans on Sunday Alcohol sales. Since the reasoning behind the Sunday alcohol bans not being reversed is related to religion how is this allowed?
In some circumstances, power to control alcohol sales is granted to the county or municipal government as opposed to the state, which is usually more restricted in what it can outlaw. There is more freedom on the lower levels of government, and in a few cases it might even be legal for the city itself to determine how it wishes to sell alcohol. Unfortunately, there are quite a few laws that exist within these lower rungs of government throughout the country that are both ridiculous and obsolete, but until those government bodies decide to abolish them, they are still laws. It isn't considered unconstitutional if the local government has been granted the power to control its own alcohol sales through the state, which is its governing body.
But their reasoning behind not selling it is based on their religious beliefs that Sunday is a "special day" Isn't that mixing religion and laws?
Pepples, my guess is that if someone challenged the law, it would be deemed unconstitutional. It seems that no one is challenging the law because, rightly or wrongly, the local populace supports it.
There is no proscription on mixing religion with laws -- Thou shalt not kill. Here the liquor is closed between 2-6 am and not any more on Sundays. Did you know that communist countries take Sunday off for the government?
It would be if the law itself was originally written and/or amended to include religious-based reasoning for its existence. Unfortunately, as OldRoses mentioned, it seems that the locals support it and therefore it will continue to exist.
I think this may be a matter of states rights, and by extension, local governments. The Constitution not only prohibits establishing a religion, but also protects the right to practice it. This is where it gets tricky, because many state laws like this one were created in a very different society from today. Though the laws are utterly absurd, I'm not sure that the Constitution clearly prohibits this kind of thing. Whatever powers were not given to the central government (Constitution) were left to the states.
I agree that these laws should be repealed. It's amazing that many of them are still on the books. I would like to hear CJ's response to this question.
I saw a news segment where a local politician actually said "people should be in church, not out buying alcohol" It seems this is a mix that should not be allowed.
I agree. That is totalitarianism and a violation of civil liberty. Thankfully, I don't see how these laws could ever make a comeback.
The 10th Amendment to the Constitution allows it. The 1st Amendment only states that the US Congress cannot make a law that respects "an establishment of religion". In other words, there can never be an official Church of the United States and there can be no federal laws supporting an actual or a de facto one. The 1st Amendment also states that the US Congress cannot prevent the free exercise of religion. Basically, state and local governments may base their laws on general religious beliefs if they choose.
Personally, I hate the blue laws too. First, I don't know anywhere in Judeo-Christian folklore that states consumption of alcohol is a bad thing and that it should not be done on Sundays. The Calvinist-Protestant form of Christianity brought it about and it was adopted by Presbyterians, Methodists and Baptists in the US. Dietary restrictions are always a characteristic of a radical branch of religion.
I do not think this is a constitutional issue. Rather a local government issue. The law was probably voted in by the people some years ago. I know in the area in which I live there used to be blue laws as well. Then it came to where you could not buy alcohol before 12 on Sundays.
I am only talking about beer. Liquor stores are still closed in this area on Sundays. I can remember when people had to go to Virginia to buy any alcoholic beverage except beer because it was not allowed to own a liquor store in this county. So, I think it is up to the people in the area and how they have voted in the past. They have been given the chance to vote and have been heard.
I really do not understand the concept of blue laws. If someone wants a drink; they are going to take their business and money to where it is readily available. As far as being seen as a sin. The Bible states that it is not what you put into your body; but rather what comes out of your mouth (heart) Everything should be done in moderation. Alcohol is not a sin in my opinion unless it changes your attitude and the person that you really are without it.
I agree! Even on a religious level it really makes no sense and instead seems to be a way of attempting to control people.
In many ways it has become an economic and business issue. In Indiana these restrictions remain in place because they benefit mom and pop liquor stores that wouldn't be as able to compete with large established chain stores.
I was on a camping trip in the Poconos (Pennsylvania) years ago...when I ran out of beer on a Sunday and went looking for a store to get more, imagine my surprise when I learned that beer/liquor stores in that state are closed on Sundays. I was less than thrilled.
There is nothing in the Constitution that says that you have a right to drink alcohol, therefore the 10th Amendment kicks in.
It is not Constitutionally acceptable. Period.
Some local laws are based on popularity rather than legality.
But that's nothing compared to the unconstitutional laws being passed since 9/11. It's now illegal to protest in certain circumstances. You can go to jail for life without a trial, attorney or phone call. HR347 and NDAA 2012 gave us this. Obama is such a sweetheart traitor he said of the Gitmo prisoners that they should stay there indefinitely, even if found innocent.
The Corporate Party has taken over but so stealthfully that most Americans still think they have a choice.
by Catherine Mostly 2 years ago
New Idea for an American Political Revolution: Masse Voter Protest by not Voting for Either Party.What if we filled Congress & POTUS during the next big election with people not running under the GOP or Democrat party? (It could be a one-time protest, not necessarily a new way for us to...
by Alex J. Reissig 7 years ago
We have all seen howsome of the recent Presidents have ignored the Constitution (AKA George Bush) or showed total contemp for it (AKA Barack Obama). IN your opinion, who was the best President from a COnstitutional perspective? In other words, which President did the best job of...
by Kathryn L Hill 2 years ago
"Reportedly, a large portion of the funds (from taxing soda-pop) will be used to expand Pre-K services." This quote is from the post found here: http://hubpages.com/health/forum/142214 … money-grab I am against the government getting involved with or offering public preschool. I...
by SparklingJewel 9 years ago
Shame on Pelosi's "Deem and Pass" Trickery Take Action! March 17, 2010House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) shameful scheme to "deem" the Senate Obamacare bill into law without a vote violates Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution. As we mentioned in our...
by Elijah A Alexander Jr 2 years ago
Hi Hubbers,I'd like some help with passing the Quality Assessment Process. Will you please give feedback on my Hub HOW TO GOVERN CONSTITUTIONALLY (must be signed in to view). What specifically prevents it from being publishable as is? Thanks!
by Peeples 3 years ago
What are the positives of allowing individual states more control?I find it kind of weird that we are the "United States" yet the goal seems to be independent states making their own laws which can contradict other states. What are the positives of allowing states to have the ability to...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|