Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HawaiianGecko
HawaiianGecko said: "The American public isn't going to buy into this tactic in my opinion."

The American public hasn't raised much of a fuss, actually. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is dominated by activist judges who make up their own Constitution when they make decisions. They are the most overturned court by the Supreme Court, but the higher court doesn't take all the cases they should.

My hope is that Bush gets to appoint three really good Justices that are determined to reign in the outlaw Ninth Circuit. To do this, they will need to take virtually every case which deserves review, review it quickly, and send it back until it is decided correctly.

There have been cases decided by the Ninth which have set binding precedent on lower courts that there is no individual right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment. For lack of Supreme Court attention, Kalifornia is now free to infringe to their hearts content. Their reluctance to ban firearms completely stem, I believe, only from the realization that they are wrong and that eventually they will be told so by the Supreme Court. If they build their house of cards too high, it will fall.

Until that time, Kalifornians are denied their right to keep and bear arms. Fees for background checks, registration, outlawed firearms, outlawed magazines, prohibitions against bearing arms, so-called "safety" requirements, etc. are all infringements. They are considering now a requirement to have serial numbers on all cartridges and only outlaws will have bullets without serial numbers.

28 posted on 07/29/2005 11:12:54 AM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: William Tell

I agree with your last post in it's entirety. It's your first argument suggesting that Democrats can receive a free pass to reject a man that they unamimously voted in favor of two years ago, without the public taking notice. If something "bad" happened in the last two years, or if some tidbit of impropriety comes to light about Roberts that wasn't known during his previous coronation, the Democrats can justify voting against him. Otherwise any vote flipping will be viewed by most as politically motivated which can be very dangerous for any Democrat that is not entrenched in a Deep-Blue state.
Ben Nelson of Nebraska for example cannot even remotely think of voting against Judge Roberts simply on the grounds of "I don't know enough about him, and it's Bush's fault."


29 posted on 07/29/2005 11:49:01 AM PDT by HawaiianGecko (Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results is the definition of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson