> Margaret wrote:
>
> >I've to admit that the current SC membership is hardly
> >a model of Constitutional support.
>
> This is one of the bizarre things about the Constituion Cult. The
> conservatives on the Supreme Court defend their position by saying it's a
> return to the principles of the Constitution - the text itself and the
> intentions of The Founders. (For them, the meaning of texts, authorial
> intention, and the relations between the two are pretty unproblematic
> things.) To them, the liberal jurisprudence of the 1950s-1970s period were
> a departure from orthodoxy, and it's only now that we're getting back to
> the purity of origins. But here we have a left-liberal Constituionalist
> arguing that the SC is deviating from the Constitution. What neither side
> is willing to argue is that these conflicting interpretations are deeply
> political - matters of relative power and privilege. Instead, it's all
> framed as an interpretive struggle around the dead white boys' text. Weird,
> very weird.
It's all a function of what's being smoked by whom.
-- Paul Rosenberg Reason and Democracy rad at gte.net
"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"