Twitter | Search | |
This is the legacy version of twitter.com. We will be shutting it down on 15 December 2020. Please switch to a supported browser or device. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.
Johnathan S. Perkins 😷
If you believe you have a right to privacy, then you aren't a Constitutional "originalist" like Judge Barrett is. No privacy right is spelled out in the Constitution, b/c its authors couldn't have predicted it would ever be needed. That's why "originalism" is radical.
Reply Retweet Like More
Paul Tauterouff Oct 13
Replying to @JohnathanPerk
How many women were working in the government at that time?
Reply Retweet Like
ChristyGo Oct 13
Replying to @JohnathanPerk
Constitutional originalism and biblical originalism seem to go hand in hand. Things have changed, y'all. Adapt.
Reply Retweet Like
Cela nous concerne tous. 😷 Oct 13
Replying to @JohnathanPerk
Does "originalism" include the Bill of Rights?
Reply Retweet Like
Adib Oct 13
Replying to @JohnathanPerk
Pretty sure per "originalism" women and non-whites don't have the right to vote... but most importantly to the gop, there were no presidential term limits.
Reply Retweet Like
Sarah Minnis πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Oct 13
Replying to @JohnathanPerk
Radical? BS? Same thing.
Reply Retweet Like
Greg Hunter Oct 13
Replying to @JohnathanPerk
The right to privacy is spelled out but you are right as it was inherent as the founders said Americans were secure in their papers. The State has no interest in what is done said or decided in my house and on my phone. MYOB clause. We need to fight for what it was intended.
Reply Retweet Like