[tired_old_conservative]

“This is always so predictable ... the father’s of our constitution clearly stated their intent. It goes back to lawyer types parsing every word ... as in Clinton (probably someone you voted for ... twice. You know, the impeached one ...) stating “It depends on what your definition of what ‘is’ ... is.”

Actually, they didn’t state any intent. They used a term with no definition in the Constitution. The case for common law is at least as plausible as anything else.

[eyedigress]

They sure as heck didn’t want a bunch of folks stationed in Washinton DC making the decision.