[wagglebee]

If the Supreme Court has accepted it, it won't be disappearing anytime soon. Nor should it.

I suppose you think that Plessy v. Ferguson should still be the "law of the land"?

Or should we still subscribe to this little gem from Chief Justice Roger B. Taney's majority decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford:
"We think they [people of African ancestry] are . . . not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States"

[balrog666]

"We think they [people of African ancestry] are . . . not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States"

Is that really your position?

[Non-Sequitur]

"We think they [people of African ancestry] are . . . not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States"

The 14th Amendment took care of that little gem from Chief Justice Taney.