I cannot imagine the Supreme Court possibly getting this right.
I’m sure the dissent will be a thrill to read, but that’s cold comfort.
I am fairly optimistic about this, but yes the idea of some of the justices turning this into a policy dispute - acting like legislators, or rather monarchs, again - sickens me.
I won’t even speculate about what could happen should there be an anti-Second Amendment decision, and Hillary in the White House. The action, and reaction, would be chilling.
Well, the case starts out ahead....the USSC would have to overturn the DC Court of Appeals to rule disfavorably.
Second, if the Miller case is revisited, it can easily be demonstrated that a short-barrel shotgun does indeed have military uses (trench clearing, for example, as was used in Vietnam).
Third, I think it will be difficult for the USSC to come to a narrow decision on this. The only plausible narrow decision is that DC is not a state. I can’t see that happening.
It all comes down to Justice Kennedy. And he’s been right-leaning lately.
They’ll deal with it in a way that doesn’t definitively define an individual right nor deny the individual right.
I’d lay book on it.
I am expecting a mixed victory out of this. I expect that they will find the 2A was intended to be an individual right, but that local jurisdictions can impose “reasonable restrictions”.