Not at all, capitan. I do however have a problem with persons who habitually form their arguments on the LOGICAL FALLACY of argumentum ad verecundiam - the appeal to authority, which is especially erronious when the authority cited is NOT a credentialed expert in the field. Put another way, you like to pull out random names that support your side of the argument, cite their opinions as if they were fact based upon their "expertise," and declare the matter settled when time and time again it turns out that your sources aren't even credentialed in the field! Responding to a legal argument with this "well, Harry Jaffa says such and such and it must be so" or "Well, Levy says such and such and it must be so" garbage simply doesn't fly. If Levy wants to state his _OPINION_ about Bollman and you want to quote it, fine! But when that opinion is subjected to material scrutiny and shown to be misleading, to say the least, as Levy's was with Bollman, you cannot simply revert to citing his authority as a basis for IGNORING those criticisms. Why? BECAUSE HE IS NOT A CREDENTIALED AUTHORITY.
When I cite sources, you'll find they they are professionals who are well recognized in their field.
Nice try, Dan, but that simply is not so. You cited Jaffa, the english literature professor, as a legal source when it turns out he does NOT have professional credentials in law and is NOT widely recognized for his work in that area (most scholars consider him a crank with some fringe theory). Now you cite Levy as a "legal" source, yet it turns out that he's not a credentialed professional in law either and that the overwhelming volume of scholarly opinion on Bollman says what the case's words make obvious: yes, it was a habeas corpus decision.
You are a laugh riot!
Professor Levy, now retired, is a noted constitutional scholar and historian. A simple check of Barnes and Noble or amazon.com will show he has several of his many scholarly books still in print. Levy has been an author, co-author, and editor of several important volumes, and has authored and co-authored articles printed in peer-reviewed legal journals. Just a list of those people who consider themselves fortunate to have published with him would constitute a "Who's Who" list of the legal community.
You keep singing the same old song - and continue to sing it off key.