Justice Joseph McKenna's dissent in a 1911 Supreme Court case, Wilson v. United States, is a forewarning of the process by which government has gradually chipped away at constitutional rights, and how the judicial branch allowed that to happen.So often case law compounds erosion of constitutional rights by citing to prior case law, but using the wrong logic or reaching just slightly deviated conclusions from the limited meaning of the cases cited.Like photocopies of photocopies, the end result is a blurred view of constitutional rights and protections that are but meager representations of their original meanings. Justice McKenna called this a "doubled distilled and treble refined sentimentaility."Justice McKenna was no great jurist, but his dissent in a decision about the 5th Amendment privilege against self incrimination seems quite relevant in these days of "grope and change" and a so-called "living Constitution.""And the constitutional protection...(Read Full Post)