3 ms·
Supreme Court decisions can be wrong; it doesn't make later decisions "revisionist". Nobody would say Brown v. Board of Education created a right from thin air
by prottog 4y ago
Supreme Court decisions can be wrong; it doesn't make later decisions "revisionist". Nobody would say Brown v. Board of Education created a right from thin air that disagrees with the history of Plessy v. Ferguson and Dred Scott v. Sanford and the historical fact behind those cases, or that Trump v. Hawaii revised the history of Korematsu v. United States and the historical fact behind it. The Supreme Court is just saying that the government has been doing things wrong this whole time.
I'm not sure why you feel that the Second Amendment is so clearly a matter of a collective right? If you read a sentence that said "A well stocked library being necessary to the education of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Books, shall not be infringed", you would say this is about the right of state-owned librarians to have books, and not the everyman?
- redeux 4y agoYou've mistaken my argument. If you follow the thread from the beginning, I'm merely using DC v. Heller as an example of how the court can set precedent to reinterpret a fundamental right under the constitution despite a 200+ year history of the opposite. This was in response to being told > Hundreds of years of case law in the Anglosphere contradict your view While that is true currently, it doesn't mean SCOTUS can't come along and decide things differently. It also doesn't change history if they were to do so.