View Single Post
Old 12-04-2012, 10:34 AM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,546
iTrader: 1 / 100%

Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
Assuming that the cited case is relevant, you do understand that a sample of one case does not make a statistically supportable argument.
Of course.

It may be evidence, but it is not convincing evidence.
It is an existence proof that the district courts can ignore Supreme Court jurisprudence if they so choose.
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. You break your oath to uphold the Constitution if you don't refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.