Citizens gain a legal weapon
in fight to thwart Big Brother
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted individual citizens the right to contend in federal court questions of excessive federal power.

The case hinges on the prosecution of a woman for the use of chemicals to attack her husband's lover. The prosecution was based on a federal law implementing the chemical weapons treaty, with the petitioner arguing that that law violated the Tenth Amendment, which reserves for the states or the people powers not spelled out as belonging to the federal government.
Bond v. United States

The justices did not rule on whether the plaintiff's argument had merit, but only on the right of a citizen to use the federal courts to invoke rights under the Tenth Amendment. The decision would seem to imply that a citizen may also invoke Ninth Amendment protections, the two amendments being closely intertwined.

The amendments read:

9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There are already plans under way to use this standing to challenge the compulsory purchase of health insurance under the new federal health care law.

The ruling also opens the door to challenges of  the numerous expansions of federal power in recent years, including various Patriot Act provisions, the Treasury's power to block bank accounts of organizations deemed -- based on speech -- terrorist, and the use of "secret law." or Justice Department interpretations of public laws that it conceals from the public.