Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Bizarre question.I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?
Maybe somewhere down the road.I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?
What would be a proper use of 14/3?Bizarre question.
One doesn't remove laws against murder because innocent people are sometimes wrongly accused.
14/3 is fine; Democrats are grossly misusing it to continue their seditious rape of the country/arsonous rampage.
8 years and counting...
The Supreme Court does not have the power to modify the Constitution.The Supreme Court might well remove it. It applied to a unique circumstance that no longer exists.
Because it would take too long?Maybe somewhere down the road.
Not a very practical solution for its current misuse.
It sure would.Because it would take too long?
Not this use, and also not your topic as outlined; this was a Civil War thing, and Trump did nothing wrong.What would be a proper use of 14/3?
What will Alaska do?
Recognizing that a constitutional provision had limited applicability is not modifying anything.The Supreme Court does not have the power to modify the Constitution.
I have not seen such a comment anywhere, but the condemnations of actually acting on it have been intense. Why do these same people not suggest removing that criteria?