Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

yonder

(9,894 posts)
8. I agree.
Thu Sep 12, 2024, 03:37 PM
Thursday

Last edited Thu Sep 12, 2024, 04:21 PM - Edit history (1)

I doubt this "life and liberty" ruling is unique, but in my layman's opinion, could be very useful in how it might apply to other states or even the U.S. Constitution's amendments laying out the prohibtion of deprivations of "life, liberty, or property".

In this case, it's not "life then liberty". It is "life AND liberty". A ruling for either life or liberty cannot exclude the other because both terms are mutually inclusive. Unless legislation is adopted to distinguish the two, both terms carry equal weight, IMO.

So yes, this is big.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»North Dakota judge strike...»Reply #8