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


1 posted on 06/04/2009 11:46:59 AM PDT by WhiteCastle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: WhiteCastle

What foreign law was cited as a basis for this case?


2 posted on 06/04/2009 11:48:33 AM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WhiteCastle
The latest ruling also may undercut a criticism leveled at Judge Sonia Sotomayor

undercut it? why? this should trumpet it.

3 posted on 06/04/2009 11:49:11 AM PDT by GeronL (http://libertyfic.proboards.com <----go there now,----> tyrannysentinel.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WhiteCastle

Heller be damned. The Libs will send cases like this up to SCOTUS every year until Heller is reversed. The Libs know how to fight. Too bad conservatives don’t.


4 posted on 06/04/2009 11:50:41 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WhiteCastle

So if the states can ignore the second ammendment none of the others should be legal either huh?


7 posted on 06/04/2009 11:53:28 AM PDT by Americanexpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WhiteCastle
...the 7th Circuit judges said they were bound by legal precedents that held the 2nd Amendment applies only to federal laws.

By extension shouldn't states be allowed to ignore any amendments they choose?

8 posted on 06/04/2009 11:55:11 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WhiteCastle

In a way, I can understand what those federal appeals judges were saying. They were not saying that the 2nd amendment only applies to the federal government. They were saying that in fact it is not for them to decide what is and is not covered under the incorporation clause of the 14th amendment. It is for the Supreme Court to decide that. Sounds like non activists judges to me and I agree with that reasoning.


10 posted on 06/04/2009 11:59:57 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WhiteCastle

I don’t recall “shall not be infringed” being followed by “except at the local level”.


16 posted on 06/04/2009 12:42:04 PM PDT by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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