Quote:
Originally posted by LessinSF
Say what? There is apparently a disconnect between what I said or even implied (nothing really, except noting that the Ninth Amendment is ignored and Third is an artifact) and the conclusions you have drawn about my meaning.
That said, like Justice Black, I do not see anything in the First that allows for time, place and manner restrictions. It seems pretty absolute to me. If you want them, amend it. As for the Third, it is a historical artifact that would not even be contemplated for discussion if the Bill of Rights were being written today. Instead, we would be tediously debating whether discrimation against fats should be expressly prohibited and animal rights.
|
If you want to have some fun with a dim litigator, raise the issue of Third Amendment Claims during a conference call. A buddy of mine did it to me a few weeks ago and had me confused as shit for about half an hour (its hard to find a concise definition on Google that explains that there are no contemporary claims of any sort deriving from that artifact). I'll add the caveat that I never attended Constitutional Law class in law school because I had a day job at the same time as the class, so YMMV with this little trick.
ETA: He and I were not on a conf call. He was Blackberrying me from a meeting. I was probably surfing porn.
