Quote:
Originally posted by ladygreek
But you know they punked out. They did not rule on the constitutionality of it but just his ineligibility to speak for his child since he is a non-custodial parent. This is not really resolved.
|
Which, of course, is the genius of this decision. They sidestepped the true question that they know is on everyone's mind: Is the use of the word God on government tender constitutional? Obviously they are trying to not to give the extreme right wingers a victory...but their point got across. Now, of course, someone who is of age will bring a suit and use themself as the sole interest represented in the case. We shall see the fancy footwork the court will do next time.
Hybrid Mode
