Dave wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:49:44 -0800, "Capt. JG" said:

"This Court...does not serve its high purpose when it exceeds its
authority, even to satisfy justified impatience with the slow workings
of the political process. For when, in the name of constitutional
interpretation, the Court adds something to the Constitution that was
deliberately excluded from it, the Court, in reality, substitutes its
view of what should be so for the amending process."

Harlan's dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims

Ah, so it's an opinion. Did that amend the Constitution also? LOL

Seems to me the last clause in the quoted language (that's the part after
the penultimate comma, for the grammatically challenged) describes rather
nicely what the majority opinion in the case did.


For some totally unfathomable, no doubt insane reason, decisions of the
Supreme Court are not based on a sole dissenting opinion. Who'da thunk it.

Cheers
Martin