What a relief, it's only the same leftist bleat about the White House "reversing decades of policy" by insisting that the Second Amendment means the same thing today as when it was written.
You hit right on the head. Why, however, does the Bush Administration not want the US SC to review the Emerson decision? Is it because they (as well as the whole damn US Senate) know that the court might actually have to address the "meaning" of "...shall not be infringed."?
What bothers me is that while they say, "yes, there is an individual right to arms", they also want to maintain, on the books, every rotten unconstitutional infringment of the second amendment ever legislated into place on both state and federal level. They know damn well that if the correct interpretation of "shall not be infringed" was arrived at by the SC, then 99% of these laws would be rendered null and void. What I want to see from Pres. Bush on the RKBA issue is a firm statement that the 1994 federal assault weapons ban is unconstitutional and will therefore not be enforced until it sunsets in 2004.
Nope,it's the White House doing their damndest to make sure nobody pays any attention to the meaning of the second amendment.
Amen!