Well done, Cboldt.
About a week ago, you posted a link to this case, and I read the entire case, and the majority and dissent opinions.
Got an education—thanks.
I still get cranks who assert I am reading the case wrong. Cherry pick the reference to the 1790 act, for example. Blatant dishonesty, is what it is. Willful misrepresentation. Moral corruption. SMH.