- Joined
- Jun 14, 2009
- Messages
- 28,964
- Reaction score
- 15,422
So you read a secondary source which wouldn't even be cited in an office memo and you believe this holds precedence over literally the highest authorities of law in the United States
- US Constitution
- SCOTUS
- 200+ years of caselaw
I'll actually read this source tho. Might be interesting
A secondary source that cites primary sources that provide historical context to the decision made by the highest authorities of law in the United States.
That was the whole point of my argument, that Scalia neglected to consider the historical context of the second when ruling on DC vs Heller.
You can quote the case all you want, that doesn't change the fact that "oriiginalist" Scalia made a big fat oopsie when he decided to legislate from the bench. Hypocrisy, thy name is Antonin.