Posted on 11/28/2007 7:58:22 PM PST by neverdem
But this is a case that could surprise, because the 2nd Amendment, once you get past the policy arguments and into legal analysis, doesn’t always divide along clear ideological lines. In recent years, a growing number of liberal legal scholars (including perhaps the most prominent liberal legal scholar, Harvard’s Laurence Tribe) have studied the history and text of the 2nd Amendment and concluded it does, in fact, protect a more expansive individual right to bear arms.
Their arguments could resonate with some of the Court’s liberals—notably David Souter, whose attention to history and text (not to mention his New Hampshire “live free or die” roots) make him more of a wild card in the case than many might think.
The Court’s four solid judicial conservatives (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito) are likely to rule the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms—indeed, even the way the Court framed the question for review seems tilted against the gun ban.
And Kennedy may not anguish much, especially since he generally favors expanding constitutional rights. This is a case where he could easily favor individual rights, while still allowing reasonable restrictions—a classic Kennedy approach.
So beyond the question of what the 2nd Amendment means for individual rights, the decision in this case—expected next summer—could well answer another question once and for all: Is the 2nd Amendment a “conservative” legal issue?
This time, the justice with the answer could well be David Souter. And then it’s all in the details.
UPDATE: Many thanks to the commenters who pointed out that the vast majority of states have "right to carry" laws, which of course amounts to more than a "few," as I'd originally written. (Even someone like me who says "the other day" to mean anything from yesterday to eight months ago realizes...
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
Sistani tells Shiites to protect Sunni brothers (Fatwa from Sistani!)
Mexicans thinking twice about U.S. jobs, survey finds
Rudy Presses Suit (The candidate, as mayor, was a perpetual plaintiff.)
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
Obviously we’ll soon find out the calibre of our SC justices...
Thanks for the ping. Good article.
We shouldn’t need the Supreme Court to allow us our God-given rights.
Thanks for the ping!
Interesting choice of verbiage. The two should be mutually exclusive with the latter obviously dominant. The purpose of the Supreme Court is to interpret the US Constitution with an eye towards the restraint of Government in favor of individual liberty. The opposing side will say that individual liberty must be balanced against the need to provide a safe society. To me, therein lies the conundrum. What is the definition of "safe?" Seems simple until you realize Clinton wriggled out of impeachment on the definition of the word "is!"
I agree. Say a prayer that our powers of persuasion are confined to just logic.
Logic, which to me is common sense, is becoming a rarity in D.C.
Sorry to pick a nit... But I feel the distinction is important.
Thanks for the needed rewrite.
We shouldn’t, but we do. As long as some government entities aim to deprive us of our God given rights, we will depend on other government entities to preserve those rights.
Governments will always act to consolidate power and it is up to the people to vote for freedom over tyranny, to un-elect those who infringe our freedoms, and to vote in those who understand and preserve our freedoms.
Well gun control demonstrably doesn't provide that. So that argument will be shot down, probably before it's even made. The Heller response to DCs request for cert mentions that little fact, that is that gun control has not made DC safer.
Or should all that fail, press the "Reset Button" of the Constitution, but I sincerely hope it does not come to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.