To: ModelBreaker; supercat
Too bad the Spineless Supremes refused to even consider that. Could either of you refresh my memory? Was a case based on the Lautenberg amendment challenged on its ex post facto provision, but SCOTUS declined to grant "cert", i.e. refused to hear the case?
21 posted on
05/16/2004 9:51:04 AM PDT by
neverdem
(Xin loi min oi)
To: neverdem
Could either of you refresh my memory? Was a case based on the Lautenberg amendment challenged on its ex post facto provision, but SCOTUS declined to grant "cert", i.e. refused to hear the case? Doctor Timothy Emerson remains in prison to this day on the basis that he possessed a firearm despite the fact that his wife had a restraining order against him. He did not commit any other crime, but the Supreme Court refused to hear his case.
25 posted on
05/16/2004 12:17:16 PM PDT by
supercat
(Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson