Still waiting for Darth Ashcroft to drop that other shoe, aren't we? You know, if he doesn't hurry up and take over the world, you guys are going to bust a blood vessel or something.

I suppose the fact that Ashcroft is actually right in his opinion of the Second Amendment, based on documents written by the Founding Fathers, doesn't really mean anything. And you notice that although he expressed an opinion, he has not actually shot down (sorry) any existing laws, so has not exceeded his authority.

The article's writer yammers:

...if the attorney general can override decades of constitutional precedent by dropping a footnote in a brief, what’s to stop him from instituting a DOJ policy barring minors from access to abortions, because he believes that Roe v. Wade was also wrongly decided? What’s to stop him from advising his minions to stop enforcing the civil rights laws, since they just bug him?

But he DIDN'T did he? And he doesn't look likely to, does he? In other words, he shows no sign of violating his oath. What's to stop Bush from dropping a nuke on Berkeley, come to that?

And what about the 5th Circuit court decision? I suppose only the court decisions that agree with your position actually count. I have noticed that court decisions that toe the liberal line tend to be quoted extensively, while opposing court decisions are derided. Heck, if the Supreme Court had come up with a ruling favorable to Gore in 2000, the left would be worshiping at their feet today.

It's been a favorite tactic to use courts to end run the Constitution, with the technique really taking hold lately. Here in California, the courts are also used to overturn proposition votes that don't sit well with the status quo. Of course, it's the most recent decisions that count, regardless of earlier ones. Remember, the courts once said it was illegal not to haul escaped slaves back to their owners.