WASHINGTON, D.C. - All other cases have been tabled to allow the court to concentrate its full attention on addressing the constitutionality of the Constitution itself.

"It's the elephant in the living room that no one has been willing to acknowledge," stated Michael Dewnow, self-proclaimed anti-Constitution activist. "For years, we've had to let pornography and hate rhetoric and violent media assail us and our children because of a document penned by men that certainly never meant to authorize such things. The expiration date on that thing has passed, let's toss it out and try again."

"I respect Mr. Dewnow's constitutionally-protected right to raise the issue," responded Cy Olson, representing the government before the Court, "but I think he has taken a, shall we say, mastication-challenged bite. We have in the Constitution a small, flexible document from which we have successfully governed a nation for over two hundred years. I am dubious of the possibility that Mr. Dewnow has stumbled upon an error that the Framers, and two centuries of jurisprudence, have overlooked."

The highest court in the land has not taken as light a view of the issues raised by Dewnow. "We cannot toss aside the objections raised in the brief before the court. To do so would be to hide from the potential consequences rather than face them." So stated Justice Alfred Umphrey, speaking for three of the justices that issued an opinion on why the court is hearing the case.

What will happen if the founding document of the law of the land is found to itself be illegal? Says Professor of Law at Wheatfield's prestigious School of Law, Dr. Phillip Fray, "Everyone in jail would need to be retried using whatever alternate basis the court presents. While this may be an entertaining parlor game, it is not something that can reasonably be implemented. The question is not, 'Is the Constitution fair?' The question is, 'Is the Constitution being applied fairly?' If it is, then it hardly matters what it says. As long as we all obey the rules, it is a non-issue."

"The great thing is," responds Dewnow, "when we get out from under this thing, guys like Fray will no longer be able to spew legal-babble like that."
(email to a friend)