1920

was the year women gained universal suffrage through the 19th amendment.

So my question, for any constitutional oringinalist out there, is this: Would you have objected to the Supreme Court deciding in say, 1915, that women should have the right to vote? Or, perhaps in extremis, had the 19th amendment not passed,would you oppose an activist move by the Court to confer universal suffrage today?

Correction....

In 1920, a New York Times editorial ridiculed Robert Goddard and his claim that a rocket would work in space:

"That Professor Goddard, with his "chair" in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution, does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react--to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools."

In 1969, days before Apollo 11's landing on the moon, the newspaper published a tongue-in-cheek correction:

"Further investigation and experimentation have confirmed the findings of Isaac Newton in the 17th century, and it is now definitely established that a rocket can function in a vacuum as well as in an atmosphere. The Times regrets the error."

Must Reading

Am I the only one who thinks it - uh odd - that the only reading we allow to the prisoners in Guantanamo is the Koran? I should think we would be better served by expanding their reading list. Maybe John Grisham.