posted by susie .
Constitutional scholars have pointed out there is an inconsistency in Justice Marshall's opinion with respect to what the constitution specifically provides. What is that inconsistency?
Folk who point out inconsistencies are folks who don't like the opinion. Here in Texas, lots of political folks are happy to point out my inconsistencies.
The "inconsistency" here is that the decision of the court was that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case, but they went ahead an issued an opinion on the merits of the case. Some folks don't like that, they claim the court should have just dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. Justice Marshall felt otherwise.
Here in Texas, Justice Marshall is a constant target of the right wing and Liberians, but then again, most educated persons are likewise targeted, unless they were "educated" at Texas A&M, which in case, they are good ole boys.