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

To: Gritty
"...therefore they will merely throw out the clear meaning of the original documents, Founding Fathers' commentary, ...."

Justice O'Connor said in her recent tv interview that she does not normally refer to the original documents, etc. -- since things like DNA, night vison, thermal imaging. etc. were not known then.

I was disapointed, since the original documents show the intent and basis for the wording.(only saw a short portion of her interview.)

36 posted on 07/06/2003 2:30:26 PM PDT by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: gatex
Justice O'Connor said in her recent tv interview that she does not normally refer to the original documents, etc. -- since things like DNA, night vison, thermal imaging. etc. were not known then.

I guess that the content of TV, radio, the Internet and anything printed on modern presses can be censored for political content by a government agency - after all, none of those things were known then.

I was disapointed,...

Disappointed doesn't begin to describe how I feel about such a statement coming from a sitting SC Justice - hasn't she ever heard of amending the Constitution? If something so desperately needs to be changed, the Congress will pass a resolution and send it out to the states, where it will be given a fairly quick thumbs up or thumbs down. No amendment = its not on our radar screen, Madame Justice, so leave the Constitution alone!

The old witch should be impeached. The only trouble is that the same Republican Snivelors, err, Senators that can't get a mere Appeals Court nomination to a floor vote will surely be unwilling to entertain this idea, let alone carry it out.

42 posted on 07/07/2003 9:50:14 AM PDT by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | 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