That is true. And that is the way it works "today", especially in internet law. Different states have different laws. But, if I "cross state lines" (like if I'm in CA and I hack into your system in NY), then "federal" law applies. So, this "internet" thing is kinda the "information equivalent" of the Islamist terrorist thing - it's "trans-national", right? It "crosses state lines".

And I mean, the gov in its infinite wisdom, is kinda responding the same way to the privacy deal, as it has to the Islamist clowns. "Clobber 'em, clobber 'em!". They're mostly scared to death of the idea that "they" won't have access to this information, 'cause "they're" technologically "behind" somehow, so I mean, they do stupid stuff like legislating against cryptography they can't break, and stuff like that. Right?

Yes, you're right about the 9th, that kinda applies "specifically" to states though, and it doesn't speak to the concept of "implied rights" (I don't think, unless someone wants to tell me otherwise). But that right to privacy.... hmm.... well, there's kinda two pieces to that - one is, the concept of "logic", which means, that you really wouldn't have some of those things that are in the Constitution, unless there were a value on privacy - but then the second piece, is that the "reasons" for the Constitution are "elsewhere" - the Constitution is a "mechanistic" document, but people often refer to things like the Declaration of Independence as being the "reasons" for some of those Rights and such - so, you know, privacy would fall under the "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", or some such thing.

But "technically", it would make matters a whole lot easier if they'd just amend the constitution and put the darn thing in there "explicitly", but I mean, the way things are now, the darn conservatives would be all yelling and screaming about some kinda liberal plot or seomthin', so it probably wouldn't pass (which is kinda ironic when you think about it, 'cause the conservatives oughta be the ones who truly value privacy, yes?).