Skip to comments.
SUPREME COURT WILL NOT HEAR SILVEIRA v LOCKYER
Telephone Call from CBS ^
| 12-01-03
| basil
Posted on 12/01/2003 9:01:41 AM PST by basil
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 next last
Help me out, here!
1
posted on
12/01/2003 9:01:42 AM PST
by
basil
To: basil
2
posted on
12/01/2003 9:04:16 AM PST
by
dighton
To: basil
black robed bastards
3
posted on
12/01/2003 9:06:39 AM PST
by
Centurion2000
(Resolve to perform what you ought, perform without fail what you resolve.)
To: basil
Do a self search. You've been ping'ed to two different threads.
4
posted on
12/01/2003 9:07:00 AM PST
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: basil
So, the Supremes ducked another 2nd Amendment case. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!
To: Dead Corpse
Gosh! I say, slapping myself in the head! You're right, I should have thought of that--
6
posted on
12/01/2003 9:12:02 AM PST
by
basil
(basil71)
To: RogueIsland
Not just the 2A, but the 14th as well. So much for our Constitutional Republic. This pretty much kills it.
7
posted on
12/01/2003 9:12:20 AM PST
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: basil
...Help me out, here!...
It's simple, the SCOTUS is made up of a bunch of weasely skunklicking puke bastards who should be rounded up and deported to Zimbabwe or worse.
To: basil
Naw. I ping'ed you in on the one after I saw this thread. ;-)
9
posted on
12/01/2003 9:13:09 AM PST
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: basil
To: basil
Tell them this:
"In short, the Silveira attorney led with his (and our) chins. He brought a foolish case, and persisted even when it was clear that he had no reasonable chance of success on appeal. His failure to file a reply brief was terrible. The fruit of his labor is a horrendous Ninth Circuit opinion which will harm the Second Amendment for years to come." -- David Kopel
To: ClintonBeGone
12
posted on
12/01/2003 9:33:39 AM PST
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: ClintonBeGone
The SCOTUS has two districts, the ninth and the fifth, directly at odds.
Were we still operating under a Constitution, the SCOTUS would be required to settle the difference.
The weakest, most worthless case should result in the second being upheld.
By declining to hear it, they are telling us that the Republic is indeed ended, but they, personally, nine black robed felons, don't have the guts to stand up and say it plainly, for all the sheeple to understand.
To: ClintonBeGone
I guess I am going to disagree with Dave Kopel on this one. I know of his work and agree with a lot of what he does. My question is this - when is the right time for me to have my 2nd Amendment rights? How long do I have to wait? I live in the People's Republik of Kalifornia. Don't give me that stuff about moving elsewhere. I want to fix what is broken, not run away from trouble. The politicians have failed, the courts have failed. What is left to do? And I do pray about this. I support CRPA and NRA, so my money is where my mouth is. So what now Dave? What is your alternative?
14
posted on
12/01/2003 9:35:28 AM PST
by
RKV
(He who has the guns makes the rules.)
To: basil
Looks like this is still current!
15
posted on
12/01/2003 9:51:35 AM PST
by
Travis McGee
(----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
To: basil
It's a good thing cert was denied. The plaintiffs in the case were criminals, and the 2nd Amendment issue was not cleanly presented.
There are other cases coming up in the federal courts with better, law-abiding plaintiffs and with the issue of 2nd Amendment more crisply presented - see the Parker case in the DC Federal Court:
http://www.cato.org/new/02-03/02-10-03r.html
16
posted on
12/01/2003 10:00:12 AM PST
by
BCrago66
To: Travis McGee
17
posted on
12/01/2003 10:00:28 AM PST
by
Search4Truth
(When a man lies he murders some part of the world.)
To: RogueIsland
The fact that cert was denied AND the SCOTUS failed to overturn Judge Reinhardt's outrageous decision tells me that both the conservative wing of the Court (Rehnquist/Scalia/Thomas) and the liberal wing (Stevens, Breyer, Buzzi-Ginsberg/ and Mama's Boy Souter) were very worried about how O'Connor and Kennedy (to a lesser extent) would vote.
It takes 4 Justices to grant cert; The fact that this case was not accepted indicates that it is likely that once again O'Connor was the pivotal Justice who has again effectively moved our country further to the left with her own erratic voting tendencies; Perhaps in the long run it is better that this case was NOT accepted, given that the conservatives on the Court might very well have been convinced that O'Connor might have voted to uphold the 9th Circuit given her sharp turn to the Left last term; Another reason why it is SO important that W. gets re-elected to appoint her replacement...
18
posted on
12/01/2003 10:02:04 AM PST
by
larlaw
To: Centurion2000
BRB's for short?
19
posted on
12/01/2003 10:02:07 AM PST
by
alphadog
To: BCrago66
Here's the Parker complaint:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/legalbriefs/gunsuit.pdf This is a better gun-right case for Supreme Court consideration because:
1 - It regards the District of Columbia - not a state - thus there's no issue as to whether the 2nd Amendment is incorporated against the states.
2 - The plaintiffs are law-abiding, thus sympathetic.
3 - It regards the most draconian gun-control law possible: The out-law of possession in the home. Thus, there can be no argument that even if the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, X regulation is reasonable regulation consistent with that right. The issue is thus squarely presented to the court: Is there an individual right to bear arms?
20
posted on
12/01/2003 10:06:43 AM PST
by
BCrago66
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson