You know, similar to how somebody made an argument that the constitution guarantees that people are allowed to marry between races, and so now that’s what it says. But you can’t point to the part where it explicitly says it.

In court, they made the argument in court. Which is now what they’re doing… yes?

I could just as easily argue that it says dipping french fries in frosties is illegal…. doesn’t make me right. (Who am I kidding fries+frosties is awesome).

For better or worse, this is the process we’re stuck with.