Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: danamco

“Sorry, you might as well talking to an empty bottle or to someone with grave ADD!!!”

Goodness. I certainly didn’t even need confirmation that you’re too dense to grasp the distinction between the original Constitution and the current Constitution as amended, even with two separate footnotes from two separate courts detailing the point. But do you have to actually be proud of it?

Stick to raving about the son of Satan. At least that’s entertaining.


339 posted on 08/04/2010 1:36:58 AM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies ]


To: tired_old_conservative
This is not a legal point.

Why change the number of a clause in the constitution even if it is inactive?

What happens when an amendment amends an amendment, partly reactivating the old constitutional clause but still keeping part of the amendment to it active?

If an amendment changes the numbering system, how does that help clarity?

In a Statute Law, referred to every day by the courts, it makes sense just to delete the changed paragraph and just renumber everything.

Doing that to an important and permanent historical record of legal changes like the Constitution of the United States of America, seems, to this UK Citizen and non-lawyer, to be harmful.

342 posted on 08/04/2010 3:33:26 AM PDT by Exmil_UK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson