San Diego Housing Market News and Analysis

if many facets of a politician's "character" is truly an issue for voters, it seems like their kids failings, to the extent they manifest a politician's character, are also relevant.

personally, i don't find it relevant, but it seems like the way voters evaluate candidates, pretty much everything, including this kind of stuff, would be relevant.

at the very least, parents need to teach their kids to be cool on aircraft.

If their biggest failing is their kid getting some drink before they're 21, I'd say that's a pretty damn good job.

Kentucky also has some interesting rules on underage drinking. The drinking isn't prohibited, the possession is.

The disorderly could be the problem

I think my husband may have witnessed some of that. He was flying TO Kentucky on Saturday and said there was some bru-ha-ha at the Charlotte airport when he was getting ready to board his flight to Lexington. I'll have to check into the timing to see if it matches up.

He must be the only 19-year old to ever drink alcohol cuz that just NEVER happens.

We don't smoke and we don't chew and we don't go with girls who do and our class won the bible!
Josh

But that's not the point... Is it constitutional?

Nope. 21-to-drink is a law that was unconstitutionally pushed on states by DC in the 1980s. (They took away 10% of highway funding if states didn't toe the line.)

On the other hand, he was disorderly as well -- if he hadn't made a putz of himself, nothing would have come of it.

Reminds me of this classic story from a few years ago...

look at the story, he was arrested at the airport by mclenburg county sheriff for
underage drinking and disorderly conduct.

assuming the sheriff had jurisdiction, it's an action by a county sheriff pursuant to state law.

I don't get your question? The states regulate drinking ages, they regulate behaviour.

it's usually a crime in most jurisdiction to be "disturbing the peace" or "Disorderly conduct" or "Depriving the general public of free use of the commons". If the kid was drunk, it's presumptive he was underage drinking.

more details may exist, such as if he was in possession of alcohol and drinking on the flight, or if air crew complained.

if you say something is unconstitutional it means :
1) The layer of government lacks that power or
2) The layer of government is depriving the people or another layer of a fundamental right.

So to give some example, the Federal Government has the right to print money and the states are prohibited to print money. So if a state were to create California Credits, and to start printing and selling them, this would be
"Unconstitutional". however, if a person were to create Satirical Arnolds,
to present as social commentary, this would be a first amendment issue.
So a prohibition of Arnolds would be a 1st amendment violation.

So are you arguing the kid has some sort of constitutional right to get drunk?
or the states can't regulate alcohol or behaviour?

if charged federally, air travel is definitely the kind of area the govcanregualte on as it clearly involves interstate commerce.

The dad, Rand, can't get too upset. Didn't he have issues with pot and the whole aqua buddha thing when he was at Baylor?

Like father, like son?