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

To: inquest

Oh, but they ARE both true, because in the present case, you admit you have no decision to back your position, yet the President DOES have the decisions of virtually every court to have ever addressed the matter of the constitutionality of his warrantless intercepts.

Game, set, match, give it up!

35 posted on 02/13/2006 7:23:30 PM PST by Boot Hill ("...and Joshua went unto him and said: art thou for us, or for our adversaries?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: Boot Hill
yet the President DOES have the decisions of virtually every court to have ever addressed the matter of the constitutionality of his warrantless intercepts.

He doesn't have their decisions to back up the view that Congress can't restrict him. None of them hold that.

36 posted on 02/13/2006 7:30:10 PM PST by inquest (If you favor any legal status for illegal aliens, then do not claim to be in favor of secure borders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | 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