Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

LT Barclay

(3,202 posts)

8. That view infuriates me as much as the constant misreading of the 2nd amendment. If the

Reply to jgmiller (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 21, 2022, 12:03 AM

Jan 2022

Constitution was meant to be viewed that way, it wouldn't have a provision for amendment, and it wouldn't clearly state that just because a right is not listed doesn't mean it doesn't exist (poor paraphrase).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Court bolsters defendant's right to cross-examine witnesses [View all] Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jan 2022 OP

I agree with the Supreme Court on this. The 6th Amendment marie999 Jan 2022 #1

If witness couldn't testify in person, setup session to videotape it iluvtennis Jan 2022 #2

What's up with Clarence? mwooldri Jan 2022 #3

Knows his wife about to be arrested, him shortly after?? Alexander Of Assyria Jan 2022 #4

I knew the lone dissenter was Thomas before I clicked on the link. SunSeeker Jan 2022 #5

Thomas, as always, was the dissenting vote Picaro Jan 2022 #6

Thomas is taking his originalist theory to the extreme jgmiller Jan 2022 #7

That view infuriates me as much as the constant misreading of the 2nd amendment. If the LT Barclay Jan 2022 #8