Posted on 06/26/2008 7:24:53 AM PDT by Bob Leibowitz
In an eagerly anticipated and strongly worded decision, Justice Antonin Scalia this morning led the Supreme Court to discover and define the Second Amendment as a guarantee of an individual's right to own firearms.
In a stunning but narrow 5-4 rebuke to liberal dogma of the past 30 years, where penumbras carried more weight than words, SCOTUS has confirmed what is known as the standard view of the amendment, that it means what it says.
While the decision does not automatically expand Second Amendment protections and prohibitions to affect state laws, it will immediately change the terms by which those restrictions are debated. In the long run, it is likely that some future case will arise where the issue of "incorporation" will be decided by the Court under either the 14th Amendment or the Privilege Clause, thereby bringing the Second Amendment to a level with the First and Fourth.
The case, which reached the Court as Heller vs. The District, is a special tribute to the foresight and conviction of one man, Robert Levy. Mr. Levy, who has never owned a gun, structured and financed the case, selected the plaintiffs, recruited the lawyers and developed the strategies that led to today's decision. At leaset initially, he did so against the wishes of the pro-Scond Amendment establishment, much of which believed at the beginning of the case, before the elevation of Roberts and Alito to the Court, that the risks as too large.
As Heller gained traction, particularly after an unambiguous decision by the Appellate court overturning D.C.'s handgun ban based on a finding that it was unconstitutional, the arguments and briefs filed by the opposing camps became a treasure trove of Second Amendment scholarship that will be studied by constitutional scholars for a century.
Justice Scalia, widely regarded as the shootingest Justice, was obviously enthusiastic in his writing, defining for history the Constitution's protection of the individual's right to keep and bear arms.
RELATED LINKS: Heller Will Win in June. How Big? has a complete review of the case and more than a dozen links to its history.
Thanks for your quick and timely analysis, Bob.
Yup...but a 5-4 decision just shows how FUBAR the 4 dissenting justice's are. We have more work to do to get the SCOTUS back on track.
If the decision is carried to its logical conclusion,
it would appear that this strikes down restrictions
against purchasing and possessing (by non felons non
mentally ill), “assault weapon” bans, and “may issue”
or “non issue” CCW policies.
NRA needs to begin challenging all the various magazine
restrictions, AWBs, .50cal bans, and all the rest of the
crap laws enacted by the Feinstein/Don Perata/Corzine/Bloomberg/Schumer cabal.
Is it me or does this prove how radically socialist and totalitarian the left wing members of SCOTUS are?
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”
WTF...damn straight Justice Paul!
Four justices believe the 2nd amendment doesn't mean what it says.
Sort of like terrorist detainees.
After these rulings you have to think twice about bringing these vermin in for trial. Just kill their sorry butts. Then you don’t need worry about some p.o.s. judge letting them go.
You saw that too, did you? Scary, very scary! See my post mere seconds after yours.
Hooray! That’s a big relief, and a decision that is long overdue. I’m more than a little concerned that there are four judges seated on the highest court of the land that do not agree.
So, when will the ACLU take their first case supporting an individual’s right to keep and bear arms? (I’m not holding my breath!)
The man hits the nail on the head -- and STILL comes down on the wrong side!
Thank you for your reporting, sir. I asked earlier whether this was a small step or a giant leap and I fear it’s only a small step - an important one, but nevertheless the progress is fragile. Watch for aggressive regulation and a liberal interpretation of what is considered an unusual weapon (aligned with the court’s interpretation of unusual punishment in the child rape case) to keep a lid on things ... awaiting a reversal of the slim supporting majority in this case. The 4+1 liberal side of the court has already shown that precedent can be cast aside on a whim.
“5-4 in our favor, we weren’t just lucky, this was divine intervention of a near disaster. “
Damn straight! We live to fight on!
Freedom is not free!
Looks like they did too.
Masochists in search of sadists never have to stand in line.
I hope Doctor Scalia’s prescriptive writing is powerful beyond my morning’s imagination, for while a happy morning to all, including me — I have given my dire cautions on the live thread.
I have to send a letter to my congresswoman(NY 4th), one of the real anti-gun proponents in the house.
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.