|
|
|
|
|
|
by andrewaylett
520 days ago
|
|
|
It's obviously not, or you wouldn't find so many people (successfully!) arguing against your interpretation. That's one of the problems with a codified constitution that's as ossified as the one in the US: the language used gets interpreted, and so the meaning of the language depends on the interpretations favoured by whoever's currently holding the reins. |
|
|