3 ms·
What’s obviously incorrect to one segment of the population is obviously correct to another. When you say “1st Amendment”, you are talking about something inve
by skissane 4y ago
What’s obviously incorrect to one segment of the population is obviously correct to another.
When you say “1st Amendment”, you are talking about something invented by SCOTUS. The original 1st Amendment was a lot narrower (it only applied to the federal government not the states.) It was only in the 1920s that SCOTUS decided it should apply to the states as well, even though there is no evidence that outcome was intended at the time of its adoption (or the adoption of the 14th).
It isn’t “gaslighting”, it is legal realism, and paying attention to historical details.
- hackyhacky 4y ago> What’s obviously incorrect to one segment of the population is obviously correct to another. That's exactly why I call it gaslighting. It brings to mind Sarah Palin's "alternative facts". Despite your miscellaneous feelings, objective reality exists, justice exists, and, ideally, the courts would be bound to follow both.
- skissane 4y agoWhat on the earth are you talking about? The overturning of Roe v Wade? I live in a country with no constitutional right to an abortion (Australia) - and we have abortion available nationwide, even funded by the federal government. Whatever the rights or wrongs of allowing or prohibiting abortion, is a separate issue from whether a constitutional right to it ought to be interpreted to exist in a constitution which never explicitly provides for one.
- capitalsigma 4y ago"Justice" is not the same thing as "constitutionality." The latter is a legal construct.