You cite a case from the 7th Circuit in 1982. Circuit courts are overturned all the time. Did you shepardize it? The court says the SC never embraces the theory the 9th amendement includes the right to arms. Of course not, the right has its own amendment, as you pointed out.
The court is not saying that the 9th amendments does not protect unenumerated rights held by the people, it's saying that it checked the SC rulings and couldn't find one that enumerated the rights to be protected under the 9th. It probably found several where the SC said the 9th protects rights not otherwise named in the Constitution.
To read it any other way is nonsense. If the 9th amendment doesn't protect unenumerated rights fo the people, why is it there and why is the wording as it is?
Certerori was denied to the SC because the point that the 9th protects what the 2nd protects was argued. Cert was not denied because the SC refused to rule on the fact the 9th protects unenerated rights.
The wording of the 9th is clear, unambiguous and to the point. No cigar. Try again.
"The court is not saying that the 9th amendments does not protect unenumerated rights held by the people, it's saying that it checked the SC rulings and couldn't find one that enumerated the rights to be protected under the 9th. It probably found several where the SC said the 9th protects rights not otherwise named in the Constitution."
A large part of the constitutional problems we face can be attributed to the way lawyers/judges misuse the english language, imo.
-- And I have no doubt that much of this misuse is deliberate.
"The wording of the 9th is clear, unambiguous and to the point. No cigar. Try again."William Terrell
"...no more interpretable than a waterblot on the Constitution."
former U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Robert Bork (on the 9th Amendment)
Oh, who to believe?
See my post #121. I think the 14th Amendment really screwed up the 9th. (to tpaine: Not that I agree!)