1 thought on “the late shift – a history lesson from HCR”
The ironic part of these so-called originalists in the Supreme Court is they always seem to fail on knowing what the intent was, when much of that information was written in the Federalist Papers or in Adam’s notes. If they utilized those sources, there would be no debate about the 2nd Amendment and its intended purpose.
Their biggest failing was taking a non-legal statement, a headnote as it was, from an established case and making into a ruling that was not made on the specific case to declare corporations as people in the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. case. Most people are unaware of that fact. But the concept as written at that time was NOT a ruling but rather only a note prior to the ruling which claimed the opposite. But deception and lies are part of conservative DNA and over the years and many cases later, it has now become law by several other court rulings.
Coincidentally, that case involved the 14 amendment.
The ironic part of these so-called originalists in the Supreme Court is they always seem to fail on knowing what the intent was, when much of that information was written in the Federalist Papers or in Adam’s notes. If they utilized those sources, there would be no debate about the 2nd Amendment and its intended purpose.
Their biggest failing was taking a non-legal statement, a headnote as it was, from an established case and making into a ruling that was not made on the specific case to declare corporations as people in the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. case. Most people are unaware of that fact. But the concept as written at that time was NOT a ruling but rather only a note prior to the ruling which claimed the opposite. But deception and lies are part of conservative DNA and over the years and many cases later, it has now become law by several other court rulings.
Coincidentally, that case involved the 14 amendment.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/ask-the-author-we-the-corporations/