Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Sure, but what Bilmore said Allard said.
|
Do y'all not practice in courts in which the rule is that you consult the legislative history only when the language of the statute is unclear and cannot be resolved on the grammar, with a judicially noticeable dictionary? Recognize that, mere days ago, several smart people were arguing that strict constructionism is a superior method of constitutional interpretation.
Allard's idea of what this amendment does isn't worth a bucket of warm spit. Plus, I think it's a lie. I cannot wrap my brain around why "state law" would have been included if his intent was other than what he now says.
