[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading through this, I'm struck by a repeated theme:
The opinion of the court repeatedly references Justice Steven's dissent,
and in several instances literally belittles his view. To wit, on page 30:
But even assuming that this legislative history is relevant,
On Jun 27, 2008, at 9:45 PM, Greg Jacobs wrote:
The decision says the 14th amendment issue was not presented by this
case (footnote 23 on page 48), although the dicta clearly supports
incorporation (page 43-44). So, incorporation doesn't appear to be
official. Can we expect that such a
