Posted on 04/20/2009 5:19:58 PM PDT by !1776!
We therefore conclude that the right to keep and bear arms is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” Colonial revolutionaries, the Founders, and a host of commentators and lawmakers living during the first one hundred years of the Republic all insisted on the fundamental nature of the right. It has long been regarded as the “true palladium of liberty.” Colonists relied on it to assert and to win their independence, and the victorious Union sought to prevent a recalcitrant South from abridging it less than a century later. The crucial role this deeply rooted right has played in our birth and history compels us to recognize that it is indeed fundamental, that it is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty that we have inherited. We are therefore persuaded that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it against the states and local governments.
(Excerpt) Read more at ca9.uscourts.gov ...
Thoughts?
very promising
This from the 9th. Circuit.
Will wonders ever cease?!!!
Next stop doesn’t have to be SCOTUS. Nordyke lost his case, but incorporation was a byproduct of this case. Alameda County won, so they won’t appeal. Next we’ll have to see what transpires in the states that are not part of the 9th circuit. I expect many if not all to follow soon.
I even did a search on "Nordyke" before posting! Must have spelled wrong or something..
Advice on how to flag a moderator to have combined with the earlier post you referenced?
I will just be d@mned!
Perhaps even the libtards are getting a little leery of King Zero?
This came out of the 9th? Is there a catch?
This ruling from the 9th Circuit Court establishes for the first time incorporation for the 2nd Amendment under a higher level of scrutiny honored by the 14th Amendment. That's big news.
It also destroys the arguments being made against Incorporation by the opposition in the Chicago Gun Ban case.
Most importantly, by affirming the lower court's decision against the Nordykes in favor of Alameda County, the option to press the issue to the highest court rests with the Nordykes. Why should they? The ruling laid out that it wasn't the gun show that was prohibited, just the danger of carrying of arms on public property in the 'sensitive area' was considered. The Nordykes ought to be able to meet the county's concern reasonably by establishing safety considerations regarding the guns being sold on-site at public places in Alameda County, or simply by moving their gun show to private property.
Just like the Heller case, the Nordyke case was another suit where the anti-gunners risked everything (even when many of their kind told them not to take this chance) and lost everything even after 'winning' the initial round. Hoisted by their own petard. If you think Washington DC would do it differently than they did had they known the outcome, well, then that goes double for Alameda County.
Thanks to Nordyke, no longer can California sheriffs discriminate who they can issue CCW permits to, or not at all. Today's decision took that away from them. Same also with semi-automatic rifles being prohibited as not having any use for private citizens. That got blown away too.
To a Californian gun owner, this means a huge amount. For those of us who live in freer states under the 9th Circuit Court, it means slightly less since we don't really have maniac gun grabbing politicians like they do. At least I don't think it does, but I'd be interested to see if 'Stewart vs. US' is revisited. In any case, if you live in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, you're presently a little freer than the rest of the nation. I hope that the 5th Circuit Court in Texas shortly follows suit, because I believe that they're itching to do so.
The Nordyke case won't overturn many onerous gun laws immediately, but you can at least consider both Nordyke and Heller to be 100 yard touchdowns after the anti-gunners ball was picked off in an interception.
Yes, the 3-judge panel nonetheless upheld the challenged ordinance.
I am very nervous about another 2nd amendment case in the courts right now.
Certainly not time to be complacemnt, or count chickend before they hatch, or...
My suggestion to everyone - join the NRA now if you are not already a memeber.
I think the ordinance was valid.
No matter how broadly you want to interpret the 2A, you do not have an inherent right to sell firearms on county property, just like you don’t have a right to set up a hot dog stand on the White House lawn.
OTOH, incorporation is a big, big, deal.
I personally think that the court overreached by saying the fairground is a sensitive area, and if the Nordykes can go back and find that the county allows other people to sell other things at the fairground, they can duke out the sensitive area part of the ruling. Which they may even win.
I just read the decision. My first reaction is that it has some good verbiage, but that the purported selective incorporation under due process was no more than dicta; not necessary for the decision and having no value as precedent.
IOW, the 9th could have affirmed the ordinance w/o giving us a history lesson and straying into the incorporation issue.
But, don’t get me wrong. I favor incorporation of the 2nd on DP grounds. And, again, the rhetoric in the opinion was encouraging.
Proving that even the 9th Circuit can read the Constitution, even if liberals and leftists can’t.
Many Supreme Court decisions incorporated a part of the Bill of Rights while upholding the challenged law. Their precedential value is not questioned. Incorporation is necessary if the merits were to be reached. If the Second Amendment wasn't incorporated, the opinion would have ended right there.
Interesting, but laborious read...
Outstanding post!
NOTE: The 2nd Amendment is SELF-incorporated to all government entities at every level. It is MORE ABSOLUTE than the 1st Amendment, or any of the others, because the wording forbids not only CONGRESS, but ANYONE from infringing on it. The 1st says “Congress shall make no law...”. The 2nd say “shall NOT be infringed!” Period! End of debate!
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.