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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LGBT
In reply to the discussion: Elena Kagan says: [View all]Fearless
(18,421 posts)40. The answer is fact. There isn't.
There absolutely should be. But there isn't.
There are only two ways you're getting something to be "constitutionally supported". That is (1) it literally says in the Constitution that XYZ. Or (2) a court precedent or more likely several court precedents have come to an ideological ("loose" interpretation of what the Constitution intends to say (ie. on things the founders could never have planned for... abortion for instance).
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
56 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Your right to privacy cannot be infringed upon. Negative right, not positive.
WingDinger
Jun 2012
#25
That's true, but the elephant in the room here is that reason and logic are not primary
Zorra
Jun 2012
#54
We covered Loving in my Business Law class for my MBA, and that's fairly recent.
Creideiki
Jun 2012
#56
I'm so glad we have you here to remind us that we don't deserve equal rights.
Creideiki
Jun 2012
#44