 
| Mime-Version: |
1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) |
| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 22 Feb 2007 18:27:33 -0500 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Subject: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed |
| From: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>
> Finally, the Constitution IS a living document. The example I gave
> in a previous message--the expansion of the franchise from white
> property-owners to a more inclusive body--is the ultimate example.
Justice Scalia would disagree, and has. He was quoted a few months
back--in a speech, not in a legal brief (and no, I don't have the
particulars, but it made the news)--as saying that the Constitution
is a legal document, just like the deed to your house. How would you
like the deed to your house to be a "living document" subject to re-
interpretation every few generations? Wonder what would happen to
legal chain of title? His example, not mine.
___________________
Donald W. Moore
Virginia Beach, Virginia
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
|
|
