Lawsuits possible from Va. Tech shooting

[Double Naught Spy]

There, see? No Supreme Court needed to "interpret" the Constitution. I was able to explain it to you without any interpretation. All one need do is follow the rules of grammar.

But Woody, you have no power under the Constitution to interpret the Constitution, which is exactly what you did by trying to explain it (which you are not granted the power to do either, I might add) following the rules of grammar. There is no mention within the Constitution that grammar be used to explain or interpret it, you have a tautological problem.

 

[RealGun]

RealGun

That would be a foul, attempting to borrow credibility. You don't know what "most other people" think. The only sample is from those who chose to post a comment

I DO know what "most other people" think. And so do you. The topic of SCOTUS jurisdiction in Constitutional questions was settled, for most people, almost 2 centuries ago. Cowboy’s position is very much idiosyncratic. And you know it. - glummer

Seems like a contest to see who can be the most dogmatic. I think you are saying that Marbury v Madison is self justifying when it actually remains debatable, no mention of such a thing in the COTUS.

 

[glummer]

I think you are saying that Marbury v Madison is self justifying when it actually remains debatable, no mention of such a thing in the COTUS.

I'm saying MOST people are not interested in debating it; they accept it as settled. That is not dogmatism - it is just a factual, accurate description of the situation at present.

 

[Art Eatman]

Sure has wandered away from VaTech lawsuits...