snilloctjc
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Messages
- 648
- Reaction score
- 401
- Location
- El Paso, TX USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
It is the supreme final word... it is just not the law of the land. Not law as in a legal sense, as was suggested.
I thought my assessment was correct this has devolved to a semantics argument. The Constitution while the final arbitrator of what is allowed to be a law, is itself not a law, so it can't be the "law" of the land. I get it.