“The Declaration of Independence...is not a legal prescription conferring powers upon the courts; and the Constitution's refusal to 'deny or disparage' other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them, and even farther removed from authorizing judges to identify what they might be, and to enforce the judges' list against laws duly enacted by the people.”

The frothing opinion of a statist witch who has never read the document she's discussing.

The statement is accurate enough on its face, the objection comes from the presentation. The Constitution doesn't necessarily 'refuse' (as used) anything, it is what it is. It is a document, based on certain intent of meaning, by way of an extremely abbreviated example: the Declaration of Independence. It limits governmental actions (including the courts), sets organizational boundaries, and acknowledges the individual to be the sovereign with all rights to remain personally intact.

Mindless babble from a hate monger...

There are others who have not read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? The President, Congress and other officials all swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States, then simply ignore it.

I hold no preconceived prejudices against this speaker -- as far as her words are concerned, they certainly ring true. In the end, it is the People who are to blame for not holding their elected officials to their oaths (of course, it is the People who do not know their Constitution or the charter upon which the nation was founded).

I have no idea what the quote is saying

The quote is a thoughtful expression of reasonable thought on the subject. Every American should know the Declaration of Independence by heart. It should be read aloud before school begins, instead of the Pledge of Allegiance. Sadly today's youth probably thinks there is a grammatical error in the document and the word Independence should have a hypen inserted, (In-dependence), precisely because they cannot recite it.

Don't worry Jack Green, Kade and Reston don't understand it either, so naturally they resort to name calling.

Quote is attributed to the wrong person! This was Justice Scalia, NOT Dr. Laura!: In Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 91-92 (2000), Justice Scalia wrote a two paragraph dissent (not joined by Justice Thomas):[14] In my view, a right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children is among the "unalienable Rights" with which the Declaration of Independence proclaims "all Men ... are endowed by their Creator." And in my view that right is also among the "other [rights] retained by the people" which the Ninth Amendment says the Constitution's enumeration of rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage." The Declaration of Independence, however, is not a legal prescription conferring powers upon the courts; and the Constitution's refusal to "deny or disparage" other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them, and even farther removed from authorizing judges to identify what they might be, and to enforce the judges' list against laws duly enacted by the people. Consequently, while I would think it entirely compatible with the commitment to representative democracy set forth in the founding documents to argue, in legislative chambers or in electoral campaigns, that the state has no power to interfere with parents' authority over the rearing of their children, I do not believe that the power which the Constitution confers upon me as a judge entitles me to deny legal effect to laws that (in my view) infringe upon what is (in my view) that unenumerated right.

Mike, Florida, thanks, you need to jump in more often.

Thanks, Mike, Florida. The quote is indeed found in the dissenting opinion of Justice Scalia in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 91-92 (2000). The quote can be found here. And, yes, Mike, please comment more often. Cheers.

An author, huh? I hope her books are more coherent.

This quote does seem to harbor the tone of a male not making any sense, as opposed to a female not making any sense.

The Declaration was the hope for a new Nation unattached to the one the Founders believed took unfair advantage of, and the outline for the resulting Constitution. The Constitution was the result of much study and those of us who are lay people look upon it as something which should remind each of us what those in government cannot do which could violate our individual liberty. This is short but the point is made...

We need to RESTORE...not continue making more mistakes.

Your negativity is beyond normal scope of today's life. America and those who live here as a whole and moral body continue to attempt to improve lives. Today, we have people who want to rule lives and we must change that. Therefore, we must RESTORE the Constitution and I will pray for you and the USA. Perhaps your work should be to free the enslaved kids both in America and around the world. They are everywhere and need help. Worry less about those things you feel were injustices then when there are injustices now which you can do something about. In the meantime, read history— the Constitution was written for all people. Even you. It is a wonderful gift from the Founders and God.  I am sorry you feel so victimized. Do something to make life better for others. It will lift you up. Don't waste precious time attacking an old lady who loves America.

I, Mr Sillik, have no criminal past. I, Mr Sillik, am not mastered by anyone. I can only speak for myself. As you might wish to do in the future. Now enough of this pettiness. Please do not address me personally again.