You wrote:
And I never claimed one way or the other that this issue has been presented to SCOTUS
That's a little important since you otherwise are claiming this is a settled issue. Nothing is truly settled until the SCOTUS says it is.
You are correct that we are interpreting the Constitution differently. What I am reacting to is your statement that your interpretation is the law of the land. It may turn out to be the law of the land, but right now it's not.
And if you think I am pursuing "being right" in this debate, you are wrong. I have strongly argued my views, but I have repeatedly stated that the law is unsettled and the SCOTUS could reach a variety of results. You have done the opposite and that's the problem and that's what constitutes pontification.
It doesn't matter whether one "cares" if one is right or wrong, as you suppose. What matters is when one proclaims that one's interpretation is "the law" and, clearly, that matter is not yet sufficiently or finally settled.
Again, your views or mine or neither may turn out to be what the SCOTUS says (if it ever rules directly on this issue). But, until this post, you consistently claimed that your views were "the law," not your "interpretation."
Big difference and, yes, I think that's important to point out.
Honestly, I think you are a little too invested in this issue, to the point that its so important to you for me to admit that I am wrong and that I should agree with you. I do feel as though I’m being beat over the head by someone who will not be satisfied until I bend to his opinions. Notice the word I keep using......OPINION. These are my opinions, and I still have the opinion I have after reading all of your posts and links and rants from external bloviators. In the end, its just my opinion......why do you care?