75
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + +
no edit summary
*Agree with Roger here.....unless you can come up with some citation or whatever to show relevancy. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 20:28, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
*Agree with Roger here.....unless you can come up with some citation or whatever to show relevancy. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 20:28, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
My block just expired. I had planned to work on this article before I was blocked without cause. But, the last paragraph of Loving actually says "we could reach the same decision on substantive due process grounds." That's very important. You don't toss in lines in SC decisions without cause. Griswold then cites Loving, saying that it's proof that substantive due process didn't die out when Lochner did. Very relevant.-[[User:BillBuck|BillBuck]] 20:35, 6 May 2007 (EDT)