I am not trying to be insulting, but, if you are a law student attending some university to get a law degree, this is something that you need to fully know and understand. You only THINK that you are a LAW student. What you are actually being taught and trained to be is an OPINION student, which has almost nothing to do with the actual law in most cases. You are being taught to follow court opinions, regardless of constitutional provisions and meaning or that of the actual law on a given subject.
The problem with the modern era teaching of law is that it ISN’T an educational process, it’s an INDOCTRINATION process. And it is to teach you to ignore the first rule of government as to its legitimate purpose and exercise of power and authority, respect and protect individual rights above all things, including and especially while the governmental actor is exercising his/her delegated powers and authority.
No judicial decision should begin with ANYTHING less than “does this governmental exercise of power violate an individual right or private property, and if so, then it is an ILLEGITIMATE exercise of that power.” And if it doesn’t, preferring instead to create a “balance” where the two are given equal consideration and treatment, that opinion is DEAD WRONG on those grounds alone.
Why is such an opinion dead wrong? Because a thing delegated cannot result in an increase of power and authority that supersedes or amplifies the power and authority of the one actually doing the delegating, i.e. no man can give away that which he does not rightfully possess in the first place. Furthermore, as Lysander Spooner commented, a power and authority delegated as being applicable to all MUST be something rightfully possessed and delegated by all, or the ones that did not wish to delegate such power would be under an unlawful coercion to abide by the will of the majority, making us a democracy where rights are decided by majority vote rather than a republic where individual rights are paramount and protected.
Of course you could argue that criminals could then protect themselves from any and all punishment by simply refusing to agree to the delegation of such governmental powers and authority as could hold them accountable. However, a criminal has no inherent right to avoid punishment for actual crimes the criminal perpetrated against another, so would have no power to deny that delegation by the lawfully (not legally) acting people as a whole.
I hope that sticks with you as you watch what develops in your ‘education’ by those that want power and control over the ability to deny the proper doctrines of equal application and protection of the law over that of responsible consideration of our individual rights for their own private profit and gain, i.e. the inherently corrupt attorneys and judges of America.
Good luck.
Tao of Law 