I don't want to hijack this thread into another silly Constitutional debate thread, it's all I used to do really, but I don't see why they shouldn't be able to. If it relates, what's the harm of saying, other people think this way too? AFAIK, nobody ever used court decisions from other countries as justification for rulings in this one, which would be ridiculous. Anyways after writing papers on 20+ rulings, I've come to the conclusion that I will not properly understand all of the "in's-and-out's" until I start from the very beginning and go one by one.
I'll just leave on the note that, IMHO, I've found that your favorite three make judgements based on erroneous reasoning just as often as the others, it just happens to be that the others are more progressive, which I feel can often be a flaw in SCOTUS. Unfortunately, the public usually has the notion that if it is Constitutional, it is somehow always OK to pass that law; as if the constitutionality was a justification for passing the law in the first place.
Bookmarks