[w7]

> How does this justify removing an actual historic term from the vocabulary.

Language mutates.

> It amazes me how someone that claims any insight in the matters of law can ask for 'sources' for such a thing. It just feels crazy. Here you go:

> https://www.jstor.org/stable/24517581

An entire article describing the: absence of its usage in scholarly contexts outside of specific cultural domains, and also simultaneously points out its usage as a ideological label.

I'll admit my error in being unable to find this, but it's not legal analysis specific, and the paper probably isn't what you were hoping for.

You probably should have picked something else.