Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (224692)	3/17/2005 5:13:01 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1571725

Sure, but this doesn't happen. It has happened on a number of occasions. Its not that unusual. If the USSC says the constitution means Y, then it means Y. No more than a USSC declaration that pigs have wings and cows can jump over the moon makes such things true. That's the way the US system of government works. The way the US system works is that if the SC says something about the constitution than things get treated as if it the constitution actually does say what the SC says it says. I think Ted's correct, all you are saying is that you occassionally disagree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the constitution. I'm saying that it is sometimes wrong, sometimes very wrong. More generally I'm saying that they are not right just because they say they are right. I am saying the constitution isn't whatever the USSC says it is. The words of the constitution have actual meanings and that if we find them to be out of date or otherwise problematic we can always amend the constitution but we shouldn't ignore it or pretend it says something it doesn't say. Tim