Source for this is from Free Republic. It is almost as if it is being blacked out. Even by sites friendly to conservatives. Where's the people on this?
Anyway, from what I've read in the comments section, the various responses from the states don't seem to address the issue that the court asked them to address.
What that means as to the ultimate outcome, I cannot say. Those who did comment said they weren't lawyers either.
Maybe you don't have to be lawyers to read the Constitution. It is pretty straighforward.
Either we have a Constitution or we don't. I've read the Federalist Papers. The Supreme Court was set up the way it was so that it would be maximally dedicated to preserving the Constitution. Lifetime appointments, not elections, make them less succeptible to political pressures. But they are not immune.
If this isn't a case worthy of their attention, then there isn't any case worthy of their attention. In other words, you DAMNED right it is worthy, and should be settled QUICKLY because there is little time.
Anybody with common sense would agree, I would think. But the way things are going, you may never hear about it even if everyone DID agree.
The media is quickly becoming very paranoid. Wholesale banning of people? Really? Why should anybody trust them?
No comments:
Post a Comment