Constructionist Supreme Court To Revisit Women's Suffrage
WASHINGTON, DC--The Supreme Court, demonstrating its new constructionist leaning since the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito, will re-examine arguments behind the 19th Amendment this week. "There was no constitutional precedent for amending the law of the land so dramatically," the Heritage Foundation's Trent England said Monday. "A case could be made on social grounds, but what the Court will determine is exactly what the framers of the Constitution wanted." While it's difficult to predict an outcome, observers believe Ruth Bader Ginsburg will use her three-fifths of a vote to oppose.
I was unaware that the Supreme Court could overturn constitutional amendments. How is this even an issue?
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
*pokes Lyr* "The Onion." Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
It is a shame more women don't get out and vote more. Isn't their percentage of voter turnout a lot less then men's?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Oh I missed that, or missed it's meaning, on my first read thru.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
someone should start a "Funny Onion Headlines." It would be a lot simpler.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
I wonder how many Hatrackers would sign a petition to end women's suffrage. Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
Thing is, this satirist doesn't seem to understand what constructionism *means* -- so my reaction to his joke isn't laughter, but "huh?"
A constructionist court wouldn't strike down things unless they really were unconstitutional. The constitution does not forbid women to vote. A court who strikes down things that aren't unconstitutional is a "living document" court.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)