I'm working on patenting a placebo-placebo.

Specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

How about John Adams instead?

Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it.

On the Pentagon Papers, it's not very clear-cut that the press has unlimited right to publish classified documents. Yes, Times v Unites States was eventually ruled for the Times et. al., but the opinions of the justices were really divided.

The Espionage Act still criminalizes anyone

"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, ... relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it."

So there is precedent in the Pentagon Papers case, but I'm not sure how it would be applied in a +400,000 document release such as this.

IANAL, BTW.

No, that would be silly.

As once was said about Howard Stern: those who love him tune in to see what he'll say next, and those who hate him tune in to see what he'll say next.

So you're suggesting that the 13th, 15th, 19th, or even the 25th amendments were bad ideas?

The Supreme Court. http://openjurist.org/676/f2d/379 676 F. 2d 379 - United States v. Ek

We hold that the stricter standard required for a body cavity search also applies to an X-ray search. An X-ray search, although perhaps not so humiliating as a strip search, nevertheless is more intrusive since the search is potentially harmful to the health of the suspect. It goes beyond the passive inspection of body surfaces. We think that the use of such medical procedures should be restricted to situations where there is a clear indication that the suspect is concealing contraband within his body.

All of which apply to border searches and not routine air travel. There's probably very little legal standing for these searches apart from the "license with the airlines" argument.

Or Morgan Freeman.

If anyone needs an example of what the internet will look like without Net Neutrality, look at the railroads.

And all we need to do is get rid of those pesky Appalachian mountains to get at it.

The old policy used to be "if it's open, make them drink it." That should still work pretty well against whatever nasty chemicals you need to make a binary explosive.

Crazy things like you don't fight terrorism with aircraft carriers?

I think the answer to "Why don't Marty's parent recognize him?" is simpler. They have the same effect that was happening to Marty in 1955, in reverse. When Marty traveled back, the picture of his family starts to fade as he gets away from that timeline. So once he leaves, the timelines merge, and his parents' memory of him fades, just like his picture faded, until the memory is erased.