XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: prochoice@here.now   
      
   On 19 Jul 2004 12:50:32 -0700, rbwinn3@juno.com (Robert B. Winn) in   
   alt.abortion with message-id   
    wrote:   
      
      
   >> >   
   >> >   
   >> > There is nothing in the Constitution about anyone interpreting the   
   >> > Constitution.  The Constitution was intended to mean what it says.   
   >> > Robert B. Winn   
   >>   
   >> Article III   
   >>   
   >> Section. 2.   
   >>   
   >> Clause 1: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and   
   >> Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States,   
   >> and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to   
   >> all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to   
   >> all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to   
   >> which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two   
   >> or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State; (See   
   >> Note 10)--between Citizens of different States, --between Citizens of   
   >> the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and   
   >> between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens   
   >> or Subjects.   
   >   
   >The judicial power extends to cases arising under the Constitution,   
   >not to the Constitution itself.  What are you trying to do, show that   
   >you are feeble minded enough to be on the Supreme Court?   
   >Robert B. winn   
      
   That point was settled over 200 years ago in Marbury vs Madison.   
   Whether you agree or not does not matter.   
      
   The USSC has the authority to decided what the Constitution does or   
   does not say.  That is firmly established.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)