Re: A Disservice to Mr. Bell

[hallam@vesuvius.ai.mit.edu]

>You might be surprised to learn that this kind of thing doesn't bother me at 
>all.  To whatever extent such commonlaw courts act like loose cannons, they 
>will primarily tend to do so against those who are most abusive of the 
>public's perceived rights.

As a matter of fact the montana fruitcakes were principally into 
racial bigotry. If you care to read the documents they filed you would
know that.

>> Thats
>>what the supremacy clause is all about. All previously existing courts
>>were extinguished.

>Ah!  So you admit that these courts were "previously existing," huh?  Well, 
>if that's the case, merely read the 9th and 10th amendments and tell me how 
>you're so sure that "all previously existing courts were extinguished."

I admit no such thing if you could understand logic you would
realize that. There were pre-existing courts, those of King George.
They were extingished. Had common law courts existed (they did not
but for the sake of arguement I am indulging you in your fantasy) 
they would exist no longer.


		Phill