At ease dear betty . . . it matters not who does the posting, only that it be posted. I but mentioned it at all to merely highlight that there was a connection. Besides, what could you be but light on my toes! [grin]
“they understand they don't have to win in court every time. It is enough to cast the pall of a threatened lawsuit to make things tough for targeted miscreants”
Exactly. “Litigation terrorists” a syndicated writer called them. Precisely what they are.
“As my friend joanie-f recently wrote on another thread: …the over-riding purpose of the Constitution was to limit the power of government over the God-given liberties of the individual.”
Yes. To be of any use, government must be able to command obedience, but at the same instance it is obliged to control itself. Society has no coercive means to enforce its distinctions. It must rely on persuasion and an appeal to societal affections to achieve its ends. Government knows no such restraints. Therefore Society must be extremely circumspect in the power to which it assigns Government, granting but little, reserving most for its citizens.
“That paramount principle has found itself compromised via countless convoluted, self-serving arguments – many of which are known as judicial/legal precedents.”
“Our peculiar security is in possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”
.....Thomas Jefferson, letter to Wilson Cary Nicholas, 7 September, 1803
We’ve been warned (like that’s done any good).
Lastly, I would note that stare decisis is a dual-edged sword for all contending parties in this little ongoing soiree. We may expect that Judge Roberts (anticipated soon to be Chief Justice Roberts) has the same sort of respect for precedent that we see in Justices Scalia and Thomas, but that he, like they, will do what is necessary sparingly but accurately.
Two features in our system support my musings: 1) the right to keep and bear arms can be seen as a built-in reset button for the Constitution, 2) that the jury of peers may acquit because they deplore the law itself (jury nullification).
No doubt both of these would cause many in government to have nightmares. But if the law is just and applied equitably - the government has nothing to fear from the citizens. OTOH, tyrants need not apply - and (IMHO) that was the point...