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.
Scary, isn’t it? Stevens should be impeached for his utter disregard of the basic purpose and meaning of the bill of rights, which was ALWAYS about limiting the “tools” government has to “regulate” the citizenry.
“Bravo, they got it right. “
Yes, but scary by how close. But Scalia has now firmly established the gravitas and extended the precedent for the 21st century.
And the libs/marxists can go suck eggs.
“Is it me or does this prove how radically socialist and totalitarian the left wing members of SCOTUS are? “
No, I had the exact reaction as you. And I don’t even own or plan to own a gun.
But I absolutely defend the right to do so.
No, all the decisions have been following a consistent theme, the government has to follow the rules.
It’s just that some rules we like more than others.
Anyway, if he is splitting these votes to make both sides happy, we need to thank God he threw this one to our way.
Well, yes Justice Stevens, that is exactly what our framers intended.
Reading some of Stevens’ dissent pisses me off mainly the part about the framers 200 years ago wanted to keep tools to restrict civilian gun ownership. Amazing some people cannot read black and white.
However - do not be surprised if Obama wins the presidency - that he will stack the Court. He will say there is a need to have 11 justices for some reason or another and then pack it wilt liberal-leftists until he has a majority.
I don’t believe that’s the angle...
Their angle is to impose their ideology, and that has nothing to do with the written word of the Constitution.
In other words, they may believe that the 2nd means what it says, but since it goes against their ideology, they’ll do whatever they can to overturn that meaning.
There's only one think consistent about this court - the 4 to 4 split between the liberal and constructionist justices.
Although, if we fixed the immigration problem right, got rid of birth-right citizenship, we could possibly prolong it for your lifetime and mine.
Vote for McCain. He's not good, but he's the best we've got. Which nicely demonstrates what is wrong with America.
“Liberals have NOTHING but contempt for anyone who wishes to “
take care of himself and be responsible for himself and his family.
The fact that it was so close is surprising considering the impression many came away with during the oral argument and questioning - supposedly even Ginsburg seemed amenable to striking down the ban.
It does show how important it is that we keep Nobamasiah and a Democrat controlled Congress away from judicial appointments. If this clown is elected in November and Dems control the Senate, look for Stevens to step down and Hussein to appoint a Ginsburg like replacement. At least I believe McCain will appoint a justice that will uphold the 2nd Amendment, since he signed an amicus brief in support of Heller.
Obama Hussein will commit the next two generations to judicial hell that I can only imagine with dread.
I know _I_ was praying, and I do feel the hand of God in this, including the narrow decision.
How many FReepers have you seen that have decided to support McCain because of the implications of a 5-4 decision? I've seen a bunch.
The Supreme Court is a joke anymore. It’s basically just another house of Congress, with rulings continually coming down on ‘party lines’.
Scalia pwns Stevens!!! And Stevens evidentally never read up on what happened on April 19, 1775. Thank God that it wasn't only the organized militia that had guns that day or we'd still be subjects of the Crown.
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.