The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2013 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul.
General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here


Comment: Minor v. Happersett
Minor v. Happersett
No one is attempting to change the meaning of the constitution, so what's your point? The SC can and does rule on how the constitution applies to a set of facts or circumstances before the court. And they do from time to time attempt to ascertain the intent of the founders when they used the specific words that make up the constitution.
Thanks for the links, I'll check it out.
“...taxes are not raised to carry on wars, but that wars are raised to carry on taxes”
Thomas Paine, Rights of Man
Replies to this comment: