*LIVE THREAD* DC vs Heller decision due at 10:00 EST (2nd Amendment)

SCOTUS Blog ^ | 6-26-08 | shameless vanity

[RKBA Democrat]

Today is the day.

The folks at SCOTUS blog will be providing a live blog to follow developments as quickly as possible.

[WayneS]

Amen to that.

I wish he had lived to see it.

[coloradan]

I have heard they’re pretty pro-gun over there. (Amazing what can happen when Dick Cheney controls the shadow government from his undisclosed location for a few years ... ‘rats start to understand why the RKBA is actually important.)

[djf]

Trigger lock requirement also tossed out.

[Crawdad]

We here in Kennesaw, GA are pleased (so far).

[bvw]

should be IMPEACHED

More for Texas V Lawrence than this. Or for yesterday's redefinition of cruel and unusual. The judiciary is a usurping tyrant, and that continues. This Heller ruling enables the general usurpation to continue by mollyfying upset gun owners. Shrewd move! Surprised more not in the majority on Heller. Heller's like grease on the broomstick shoved.

[mpackard]

DITTO: This means that we’re ONE VOTE FROM TYRANNY!! How is this a victory?????

[Kozak]

The whining and cursing on DU has already begun. One poster has stated that this will decrease our average life expectancy by a few years.

When does the gun hunting season on domestic Liberals open? (;-)

[WayneS]

Decrease the life expectancy of a DU dingbat?

This is even better than I thought!!!!

[mondonico]

Just skimming Scalia’s opinion—it looks like he makes an exhaustive historical case for the Court’s decision, making use of the many excellent briefs filed on the side of the RKBA. This is good news because it will provide context for lower courts and, more broadly, educate the public (those who have open minds, at least) about the second amendment in particular and constitutional jurisprudence in general.

[KoRn]

/cheers!!!

Still waiting to see the details.

[RockinRight]

Interesting. I found a thread where they actually seemed to support it - got a link?

[popdonnelly]

how the heck was this such a squeaker? I’m disappointed in the 5-4 decision..

Because four members of the Court have their own agenda, regardless of the language in the Constitution and the intent of the framers.

We can’t afford any more Supreme Court Justices with a liberal agenda. We have got to keep Obama out of the White House.

[RamingtonStall]

This was a 5-4 decision. THIS IS WHY WE MUST ELECT JOHN MCCAIN, WARTS AND ALL, THIS NOVEMBER. Can we really bear having a radical Chicago machine politician appoint the next Supreme Court justice?

The Choice is between THE DEVIL and THE SINNER MAN!

Given the choice, The Sinner Man with Warts is a geat choice!

RamS

[MrB]

If those phrases are written into the majority decision,

that’s a HUUUUUUUUUU(GH)GE WIN!

[Brilliant]

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”

He said such evidence “is nowhere to be found.”

And where did they guarantee the right to an abortion?

[NewJerseyJoe]

I found it very telling (in a positive way) that the opening part of Scalia's opinion talked about traditional uses, including SELF-DEFENSE -- meaning, they didn't trot out the tired old hunting argument ( "We're not opposed to people having guns for hunting") -- which has NOTHING to do with the 2A.

2A is about self-defense -- against criminals AND against oppressive government.

[kevkrom]

1. Operative Clause. a. “Right of the People.” The first salient feature of the operative clause is that it codifies a “right of the people.” The unamended Constitution and the Bill of Rights use the phrase “right of the people” two other times, in the First Amendment’s Assembly-and-Petition Clause and in the Fourth Amendment’s Search-and-Seizure Clause. The Ninth Amendment uses very similar terminology (“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”). All three of these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not “collective” rights, or rights that may be exercised only through participation in some corporate body.

[SE Mom]

Here we go- clinging bitterly- the opinion states:

10:24 Tom Goldstein - Quoting the syllabus: The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

[Tatze]

Just a few DUmmies, who I’m sure will be tombstoned shortly.

But for the most part, they don’t have much to say. Only a handful of posts. Less than 20 posts on the 2 threads I could find.

[FreedomProtector]

Gotta give Bush credit for not repeating one big mistake of his father: Souter.