To: decimon
Pardon me! Is this legal? I thought the Constitution prohibited ex post facto laws.
5 posted on
05/20/2008 5:27:58 PM PDT by
Paleo Conservative
(1984 was supposed to be a warning not an instruction manual! ©)
To: Paleo Conservative
Pardon me! Is this legal? I thought the Constitution prohibited ex post facto laws. You never heard of grandfathering? Yeah, that's it, grandfathering.
6 posted on
05/20/2008 5:32:24 PM PDT by
decimon
To: Paleo Conservative
I thought the Constitution prohibited ex post facto laws. Man, like - the Constitution is like, so, yesterday!
8 posted on
05/20/2008 5:45:21 PM PDT by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: Paleo Conservative
They don’t need no steeking constitution!
16 posted on
05/20/2008 6:11:14 PM PDT by
Blood of Tyrants
(G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
To: Paleo Conservative
They don’t need no steenking constitution!
17 posted on
05/20/2008 6:11:21 PM PDT by
Blood of Tyrants
(G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
To: Paleo Conservative
Pardon me! Is this legal? I thought the Constitution prohibited ex post facto laws. I think because this LOOSENS the law it is Constitutional.
Not that many care about the Constitutionally of laws around here any more.
19 posted on
05/20/2008 6:37:16 PM PDT by
Balding_Eagle
(OVERPRODUCTION......... one of the top five worries for American farmers.)
To: Paleo Conservative
Pardon me! Is this legal? I thought the Constitution prohibited ex post facto laws.That only applies when it doesn't involve guns, booze, tobacco, ribeyes, Twinkies or anything else that the peasants might enjoy.
The ruling class create exceptions only when they get caught up in their own B.S.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson