Wrong!  No common law-state or federal-can be enacted that is not in conformance with the United States Constitution...Val09, provide the proclamation ratified by 1/3rd of the voters of the United States that Amends the Constitution to make the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./State citizens distinguishable because of their "Indian ancestry/race!"  Neither can any 'relationship' by a politician be conducted not in conformance with the Constitution;
"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed ... An unconstitutional law is void. (16 Am. Jur. 2d, Sec. 178)."   Constitution makes for no such 'relationships!'