Quote:
|
Right, that would be the Supreme Court. But Libertairians aren't so down with that when the court rules in ways they do not agree with.
|
Only when their interpretation is in direct violation of the actual document.
If the supreme court ruled that the federal government could break up peaceful protests on alotted private land, they would be ruling against the constitution.
Quote:
|
And the founders built within the Constitution the means of altering it.
|
No. That is not a reason to disregard the constitution.
If the document was inflexible and had no amendment process, we would have thrown it out as soon as it needed a change. The fact that it has one doesn't mean that it can change at a whim and that we should chuck it.