>
Oh, he’s CORRECT, but not necessarily for the wrong reason(s).
Not really, no.
Course, the ‘court’ doesn’t care about the Constitution, let alone A1S8, or another other Amendment(s).
What you mean is that the Courts don’t agree with your interpretation of the Constitution. Especially relating to Article IV, Section 3.
>
Humm, which comes first? A1S8 or A4S3? Another ‘Commerce Clause’ trumps all else theory?
The courts don’t ‘agree’ w/ the plain English of the CONSTITUTION; but damn if THEY are the ‘final arbiters’. We the People are, have been and always will be.
Forts, postal roads (setup) and the like. Not difficult to read and understand, except for a Leftist.
That's like saying the Third Amendment trumps the Fourth Amendment. All Articles, Sections, and Clauses stand alone and equal in the Constitution. Position is meaningless.
The courts don’t ‘agree’ w/ the plain English of the CONSTITUTION; but damn if THEY are the ‘final arbiters’. We the People are, have been and always will be.
What makes your interpretation right and their interpretation wrong?
Forts, postal roads (setup) and the like. Not difficult to read and understand, except for a Leftist.
So...national parks? Unconstitutional. National highway system? Unconstitutional. Air Force bases and the Air Force itself? Unconstitutional. Air traffic control network? Unconstitutional. Is that what you're saying?