Mojo_PeiPei

That comment seems odd RB.

Is it because Strict constructionists don't appeal, or rule in a progressive manner?

I can admit that with a 200+ year lapse time, the times and cirumcstances have changed, as such some adaptation is necessary.

But borrowing a page from DC_Dux, the constitution is what it is. I don't see how borrowing from foreign law, or inferring decisions from "implicit" wording or "spirit", or pulling decisions out of the air is any better or less altering.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.