[Jeff Higgins]

There is absolutely NO ambiguity on who "the people" are with regards to the Bill of Rights. All ten reaffirm rights held by citizens; they do not reafirm or grant rights to the State.

The difference between the concept of "reaffirmation" and "grant" is very important. The Bill of Rights does not "grant" anything. It reaffirms rights inherent in all men. "Birthrights", so to speak (I hesitate to say "God given rights" because I know how many of you feel about that one, but call these rights what you may); rights the State cannot take away. It bars the State from relinquishing rights it does not have the power to grant in the first place. That is what makes it such a unique document; it places restrictions on the State, not the people.

In that light, and looking at the entire context in which the Bill of Rights was written, it is ludicrous to suggest that nine ammendments preserve the rights of the people, while one preserves a right of the State. It is almost unfathomable that this is even still a question. That the Supreme Court continues to avoid any kind of ruling on this.