Skip to comments.
Good news 2nd ammendment case
Supreme court webpage ^
Posted on 11/06/2003 6:29:38 AM PST by woerm
Silveira has been posted to 11-26 conference
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/03-51.htm
further info on case is at
www.keepandbeararms.com
r
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2ndammendment; banglist; scotus; secondammendment; silveira; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-134 next last
1
posted on
11/06/2003 6:29:39 AM PST
by
woerm
To: woerm
I just hope the "Living Document" side loses here.
To: *bang_list
Silveira has been posted to 11-26 conference OK, Constitutional and/or Supreme Court scholars, what exactly does this mean - has Cert. been granted or not? If not, is this a positive sign?
To: Joe Brower
Take a look at this!
To: Ancesthntr
It means that the justices will decide on November 26 whether to grant certiorari, and that docket sheet also means that they're taking this case very seriously (in September they explicitly requested response from California).
5
posted on
11/06/2003 6:46:54 AM PST
by
AntiGuv
(When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
To: AntiGuv
So it will either be a very good or a very bad Thanksgiving - thanks for the info.
To: El Laton Caliente
It's not going to happen. We had to depend on Justices like O'Connor to do the right thing and look what she said about International Law.
We waited 40 years for a case before THIS Supreme Court? It's stupid.
To: Ancesthntr; Congressman Billybob; AJFavish
legal commentary solicitation ping...
8
posted on
11/06/2003 6:51:24 AM PST
by
SteveH
To: AAABEST; wku man; SLB; Travis McGee; Squantos; harpseal; Shooter 2.5; The Old Hoosier; xrp; ...
I am constantly reminded of the phrase, "One does not make history; one merely survives it".
9
posted on
11/06/2003 6:54:32 AM PST
by
Joe Brower
("The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus)
To: woerm
To: El Laton Caliente
the "Living Document" sideThe irony of their possition is that it in effect shoots it dead.
11
posted on
11/06/2003 7:01:53 AM PST
by
StriperSniper
(All this, of course, is simply pious fudge. - H. L. Mencken)
To: Shooter 2.5
As usual I agree with you 1000%, I don't trust this SC one bit. They have a long list of horrid rulings.
12
posted on
11/06/2003 7:03:43 AM PST
by
AAABEST
To: Shooter 2.5
You are correct, unfortunately. And the maddening thing is that we have GOP Presidents to blame for this court's makeup.
13
posted on
11/06/2003 7:09:22 AM PST
by
Sloth
("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, 'Zoolander')
To: Sloth
Clintoon confirmed the last two justices. This is his court.
After watching the Wisconsin Assembly last night on the CCW debates, I'm not blaming the Republicans for anything.
To: Shooter 2.5
We waited 40 years for a case before THIS Supreme Court? It's stupid. Hey, Shooter, this is the world we live in. It isn't always ideal - you do the best you can with the cards you are dealt. I very much admire your obvious committment to the upholding of the 2nd Amendment, but I am kind of tired of you complaining over the last several months about this case. What would you have done during WW2, complain that we shouldn't have gotten involved until a year or so later, because we weren't prepared enough to fight? What you should be doing is to roll up your sleeves on this issue, like so many Americans did during WW2, and say "let's finish this thing the right way, even if I don't like the situation we're in." The battle is here, NOW, on THIS case - whether or not you, I or anyone else likes it - so NOW is the time to support the case. I seriously doubt that the antis are anywhere near as fractured as our side on this case - but statements such as yours have, over time, contributed to US being fractured.
Please don't take this criticism the wrong way - I also don't think that this is the ideal time for such a case, nor that it is the ideal case. But such things come along maybe once every several decades in ALL areas of the law, let alone the very narrow area of the 2nd Amendment. I don't think that it is a very good idea to wait and wait and wait - things AREN'T getting better, and may get worse regarding the 2A.
And I seriously hope that you aren't against this case because the NRA wasn't involved from the start. The NRA is an organization that I have belonged to since George I banned the importation of "assault weapons" in '89. However, toeing the "party line" on this is akin to putting a political party's interest over that of the Republic.
I urge you reconsider your views, since the battle is on. Please stop discouraging people from contributing to this case, as it only hurts us. The time for arguing whether the case should be brought is long, long past. The case is here, and the SC WILL decide on Cert. on 11/26. Ideal case or no, it is the only reasonable chance that the pro-gun side has to overturn a bunch of unconstitutional laws. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
To: Shooter 2.5
I see a ruling in the SCOTUS to be very positive, no matter which way they decide.
Do they really have the guts to ignore the mountain of fact and history and rule directly against the Constitution?
Let's get to it.
To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com
Reminder prediction:
Cert granted.
RKBA held to be an individual right. ("We win.")
Remand to CA courts to determine whether CA ban infringes that right.
CA courts rule it is a reasonable restriction, not an infringement.
9th circuit agrees.
NO conflict (yet) between circuits, so SCOTUS refuses cert.
CA ban remians unchanged.
To: Ancesthntr; the gillman@blacklagoon.com
You two haven't been reading the news. The dems are losing on almost all fronts.
All it would have taken was to re-elect Bush, later a conservative in the next term and confirm more pro-gunners in the Senate.
It may have taken only eight more years but we could have solidified our hold on the Supreme Court.
That didn't happen because of someone who thinks a rule either way is a good thing. It's not.
One more time. We waited forty years for a court like this? It's incredibly, brain dead, stupid.
To: Beelzebubba
I don't believe for a minute that the SCOTUS will take the case. I expect we'll get screwed again, as usual.
To me, any restriction at all is much much more than an infringement, but we don't speak english much in America anymore.
I would love to see them take the case and issue a ruling.
Doubt it will happen.
To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com
I share your view.
Either way a SCOTUS ruling will help extract us from what Claire Wolff calls the "awkward time."
Regards,
20
posted on
11/06/2003 7:28:26 AM PST
by
Triple
(All forms of socialism deny individuals the right to the fruits of their labor)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-134 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson