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

To: JerseyHighlander
It means that Cruikshank will be overruled in a future case. There's no logical reason for not "incorporating" the Second Amendment, while the First is incorporated. That overruling couldn't take place in Heller, because the case did not involve a State.
3 posted on 06/26/2008 9:43:12 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Repeal 16-17; JerseyHighlander
What is the length of the decision? Something like 180 pages?

Seems to me the direction the courts in the whole country in every state will have to take is to kick out laws like the DC "no possession" law. The reason is simply that even if you lost at the state supreme court level in a case like this when you appealed to the US District Court for relief the judge there would be prohibited from upholding the decision of the state courts.

You win when the federales are disabled.

Seems to me New Jersey's overly restrictive laws will soon be toast.

17 posted on 06/26/2008 12:47:17 PM PDT by muawiyah (We need a "Gastank For America" to win back Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Repeal 16-17

way to see around the corner. I don’t doubt that Scalia was waving a big red flag for the NRA to go after Cruikshank.


20 posted on 06/26/2008 1:33:22 PM PDT by bpjam (Drill For Oil or Lose Your Job!! Vote Nov 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | 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