so, first, zenger is before the constitution. marbury v. madison is about original v. appellate jurisdiction, and who cares? it's not any great principle of liberty. dred scott is about the fundamental right to have slaves or something but, yes, that actually could count as a bill of rights idea. but here -- landmark cases that you tossed out, and strictly speaking, they're not bill os of rights cases. and i'll add a few more. griswold v. connecticut, new york times v. sullivan, brown vs. board of education, roe v. wade, lawrence v. texas, miranda v. arizona, none of those is a bill of rights case. tinker v. des moines. why not? because the bill of rights originally applied only against the federal government. congress shall make no law of a certain sort, and the tenth amendment is about states' rights. and in between there are celebrations of local juries and local militias. the original bill of rights was an a anti-federalist, tea party, localist suspicion of the federal government. and that's important, but that's not our bill of rights today because you believe we