Justin, you have a way of telling me things I already know while not
answering the real point, which is about your strange affection for the
glorious 'C' especially the notably undemocratic bits of it. Is it
professional amour propre that disposes you thus, or what?
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:12 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:19920] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1
> In a message dated 6/5/00 6:34:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << discrete and insular minorities << protected by the "C" were/are who
> exactly? Blacks? American Indians? Women? Hispanics? Bankers? >>
>
> The phrase is from the famous (to Americal lawyers) footnote 4 of the 1939
> S.Ct case US v. Carolene products, explaining that for bankers and other
> objects of what is called social and economic legislation, there is no
> special constitutional protection, but for discrete and insular
minorities,
> which in the context meant primarily blacks, but not only them, the courts
> had to offer special constitutional protections because their minority
status
> meant that would be at a disadvantage in the political arena, This is part
of
> the basis of the notion that the couers have a special role to play in
> protecting individual liberties and minority rights. (Not numberical
> minorities, but mainly racial ones.) --jks
>
>
