------------------------------------------------------------


Did the framers of the constitution really say that government could legally seize your land if any private sector business could potentially provide a higher tax base for them to draw upon? Because that's what the 5 Liberal activist judges ruled in the eminent domain case--Does that mean they made the correct decision?

Once upon a time SC judges ruled black people were not to be afforded Constitutional rights because they were considered 3/5's human--did they make the correct decision? Should that decision be allowed to be accepted legal precendent that was never reviewed or corrected just because a certain amount of SC judges once ruled that way?

I'm not a legal scholar like you are Rory.

I guess only "liberal" judges legislate from the bench, though.

Did you get that sand out yet?