"This state constitutional amendment would be 'an unprecedented attack' on the state constitution." Can a valid constitutional amendment ever be an attack on a constitution, or is this sort of argument nonsensical?
Without comment on the merits of the proposed amendment, I don't understand how any proposed amendment can be considered an attack on existing law.
As with any proposal, you're for or against it. Vote as you will.
And before someone comes at me with "Just because the Supreme Court passes it doesn't mean it's in the constitution!" No it doesn't, but following the decisions of the Supreme Court is in the constitution. Whether you agree with it or not.
Comments: Add Comment