The Text The Preamble To The US Constitution Challange

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
21

You have to know the original to decipher that; it’s gobbledegook to me.

22

I don’t think you have to know the original, but you do have to think like me.

And a lot of it is standard texting or standard abbreviations:

d = the (texting: sounds like the)
ppl = people (text)
/ = of (standard abbreviation, especially for math and rebus people)
US = United States (abbr.)
N = in (text)
ord = order (abbr.)
2 = to (text)
mo = more (text: from AAVE slang)
prfct = perfect (text, but less common)
est = establish (abbr.)
just = justice (standard title abbr.)
comn = common (text)
gen = general (title abbr.)
& = and (both)
lib = liberty (abbr.: also liberal, but liberty makes more sense in context)
rselv= ourselves (text, variation on Rselvs)
r = our (text, though usually capitalized–my bad)
const = constitution (abbr.)
USA = United States of America (abbr.)

I do admit that the rest pretty are either vowel removals, or assume you can guess based on the small amount of words that start with those letters. And maybe it’s the mixture that makes it worse.

23

  1. Such a law can only operate notwithstanding certain clauses of the Charter. The section on election rights (3), for example, cannot be overridden, nor can the section requiring Parliament and the legislatures to sit at least once a year (5), nor the section allowing the courts to redress violations of the Charter (24).

  2. Such a law can only continue to exist for five years, which is also the maximum length of time between elections. Therefore, if the law in question is to continue to exist, it must be re-approved by a new Parliament or legislature.

  3. The NWC has never been used at the federal level and there is a very strong prejudice, verging on a constitutional convention, against its use. There is a high probability, in my opinion, that a law that purported to use the NWC in such a way as to pervert the intent of the Constitution would be voided by the Supreme Court.

I am not a fan of the NWC, but IMHO it doesn’t “negate” the Charter, and it demonstrably doesn’t negate the “whole” Charter.

24

I think you mean