Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Online

49,00 € / $74.00*

* Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.
Publication Date:
September 2004
ISSN:
1540-8884
DOI:
10.2202/1540-8884.1041

See all formats and pricing

Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 49.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 74.00 *
Print
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 118.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 158.00 *
Print + Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 142.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 190.00 *
*Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.

The Forum

A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics

Ed. by Shafer, Byron / DiSalvo, Daniel

4 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2011: 0.333

 

VolumeIssuePage

The Ninth Amendment and the Negative Pregnant

Danny M Adkison

1Oklahoma State University

Citation Information: The Forum. Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages –, ISSN (Online) 1540-8884, DOI: 10.2202/1540-8884.1041, September 2004

Publication History:
Published Online:
2004-09-16

This article explains why the Framers (the authors of the U.S. Constitution of 1787) did not include a Bill of Rights. It challenges the conventional understanding that portrays the Framers as insensitive to individual rights, and argues that the historical record clearly shows that it was out of a concern for the legal concept known as “negative pregnant” that explains their actions. It also challenges the conservative interpretation of the Ninth Amendment given by Robert Bork. The Ninth Amendment was designed by Madison as a solution to the negative pregnant, but has been mostly ignored by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.