[Congressman Billybob]

You DO understand Judge Napolitano correctly. That's what he said, and meant. In this instance the good judge is wrong. He also has some errors in his book on constitutional law.

He's a bright guy, and speaks well. But he ain't no scholar on the history and details of the Constitution, from 1787 to 2005. Nor has he practiced in the Supreme Court, as I have for 32 years.

So, not only do I sometimes disagree with the judge, I feel I have at least an equal claim to have the ideas down correctly. That don't mean I'm always right. LOL.

John / Billybob

[Revel]

don't you think you are a bit full of yourself?

[dimquest]

Congressman Billybob opined: On the other hand, forcibly moving people out of their homes on public health grounds to prevent an epidemic of several dozen available diseases in that fetid water is legal under civil law. All states have some legal provisions for cutting off epidemics when they first threaten. (The Center for Disease Control provides information and support for any such effort. But the legal authority belongs to the state Health Department.)

" -- FWIW, Billybob, arrording to FNC's Judge Napolitano, that's only legal if the authorities can prove the folks inside are actually a health hazard. If I understood the judge correctly :)
194 mewzilla

You DO understand Judge Napolitano correctly. That's what he said, and meant.
In this instance the good judge is wrong. He also has some errors in his book on constitutional law.

You think a judge is "wrong" for insisting that authorities must demonstrate that folks are actually subject to a "health hazard" before ordering them out of their homes? Judges are bound by oath to defend our Constitutions rule of law. Napolitano is doing just that. What are you doing?

He's a bright guy, and speaks well. But he ain't no scholar on the history and details of the Constitution, from 1787 to 2005. Nor has he practiced in the Supreme Court, as I have for 32 years.
So, not only do I sometimes disagree with the judge, I feel I have at least an equal claim to have the ideas down correctly. That don't mean I'm always right. LOL. John / Billybob

Hubris goeth before a fall.

[Nov3]

He's a bright guy, and speaks well. But he ain't no scholar on the history and details of the Constitution, from 1787 to 2005. Nor has he practiced in the Supreme Court, as I have for 32 years.

I bet he knows you don't need to register guns in the US.

[El Gato]

You DO understand Judge Napolitano correctly. That's what he said, and meant. In this instance the good judge is wrong. He also has some errors in his book on constitutional law.

Some? The thing is so full of holes it might as well be Swiss cheese. And that's just on matters of fact, not of legal opinion. Mark Levin's book is much better, or at least more factually correct.