If the SCOTUS acts towards the Constitution again as Obama has, as well as attack the meaning of language to distort it (again), we are heading for a constitutional crisis at the very least.
- to move while holding up and supporting (something)
- to be equipped or furnished with (something)
Ironically, the definition is irrelevant, made so by the fact that our legislators aren’t even allowed to infringe on the right. Meddling in the weeds about the definition of something that shall not be infringed upon is itself seeking a way to do exactly that. Am I wrong?