Talk:Constitution Restoration Act

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 March 2013. The result of the discussion was keep.

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is expansion really needed?

The only expansion need that I can see is for documented arugments from proponents explaining away how that if this bill passed that anything that a legislature wanted to do after that would be stated in terms that was being done in some way to honor God and hence not subject to judicial review. The current article cites people who already have the viewpoint that its passage would allow almost any legislation to exempt itself from judicial review (a concern I share); what is needed is documented (not original) counter-arguements about how this would not be the case. Surely such exist? Rlquall 20:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drafted by...

A recent editor added a sentence stating that the bill was authored by a team of over 25 legal experts headed by Moore and Titus, rather than by the two themselves. However, I've been reading Moore's autobiography So Help Me God in order to better-develop his article, and found this sentence:

To address the problems of a 'run away' federal judiciary, Herb Titus and I drafted the Constitution Restoration Act (CRA) of 2004, after consulting many people...
— Roy Moore, So Help Me God, p.250

I suspect that the previous editor, who said "I was there" in his edit summary, is correct, and that Moore could be omitting or obscuring the additional work of over two dozen other people for any number of reasons. But as this information is verifiable through secondary and tertiary sources, it takes precedent here. -- H·G (^words/_works) 19:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Constitution Restoration Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060217194516/http://www.meria.net:80/subscribers/interviews/joan_bokaer_dominionism.html to http://www.meria.net/subscribers/interviews/joan_bokaer_dominionism.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:06, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]