Roe v. Wade

[A18]

So why do you keep claiming your interpretation as fact?

If you're going to interpret something in English, it makes the most sense to use the common dialect of the time. Otherwise, you are allowing for arbitrary amendment through change in language. An author can't predict what his words might mean in common usage 200 years down the road.

So you're just making it up then.

[opebo]

So why do you keep claiming your interpretation as fact?

Because I like the Right to Privacy.  The Constitution is practically worthless without it.