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

To: mlo
”No scrutiny is better than strict scrutiny. “

I don’t agree. Twenty five or so states no longer require carry permits. That constitutes proof that California is not compelled to demand such permits since there is no blood running in the streets.

This decision allows California to inconvenience people with hardly any limits as long as their laws do not allow subjective discrimination. Strict scrutiny was not a bad way to go as far as I can tell.

117 posted on 06/23/2022 11:16:18 AM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: William Tell
Nobody is saying California was compelled to demand permits.

"This decision allows California to inconvenience people with hardly any limits as long as their laws do not allow subjective discrimination. Strict scrutiny was not a bad way to go as far as I can tell."

I'm not convinced that strict scrutiny doesn't apply here. But anyway, I think you have it going the wrong way. Intermediate scrutiny would allow more burdens on the right. Strict scrutiny would allow fewer. No scrutiny would allow none. Not more.

119 posted on 06/23/2022 2:26:46 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | 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