Posted on 02/09/2003 7:35:21 AM PST by nwrep
Associate Justice Janice Rogers Brown, who is new to the Court since the 1996 decision, seemed clearly hostile to pro-choice arguments, challenging the trial court's authority to second-guess the Legislature's findings about teens and abortion.
So did David Souter.
Let's pass on Brown...Mike Luttig is ready to serve, and help restore the Constitution to its rightful place as the immovable bedrock of law.
The gun industry argued to the seven justices that local governments are powerless to regulate the industry because the Legislature has authorized gun shows on public property. The industry said the local laws were pre-empted by state rules.
Bad - But none of the state's seven high court justices agreed. "For good or ill," wrote Justice Janice Rogers Brown for the court, "the Legislature stood up and was counted on this issue, one of the most contentious in modern society."
In her opinion for the court majority, Brown strongly rejected any suggestion that the state Constitution protects the rights of Californians to own weapons.
"No mention is made [in the state Constitution] of a right to bear arms," Brown wrote.
The court majority also rejected the challenge that the law was invalid because it failed to ban all similar weapons.
"Doubtless, 10 years after Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act became law in California, many semiautomatic weapons potentially classifiable as assault weapons remain on the market here," Brown wrote.
"That may or may not be regrettable, depending upon one's view of this highly charged public policy question," Brown added, "but it does not amount to a constitutionally fatal flaw."
The court defended the law's provision that allows the attorney general to ask Superior Courts to add new weapons to the outlawed list. The role of courts in this is "a very narrow, essentially adjudicatory one," Brown said.
--------------------------------------------
Now what I need to know is this
1. Is there a right to keep and bear arms in California's state constitution - if the answer is yes, then I'll be pushing for her defeat.
2. Did the gunmakers try and argue that the 2nd amendment applies to the states as well. If it is not argued, she can't rule that it is or isn't. If they argued that it did, then I'll be pushing for her defeat.
If the answer to both is no, I'm still undecided, and need to do more research on it. My support or opposition to Justice Brown rests on that issue.
I heartily disagree. Orrin Hatch's furious rampage against Schumer, Leahy and their chief Estrda-bashing source, Richard Bender, were absolutely devastating. We on FR who watched and commented were stunned to see Hatch unleash as he did, and the Dems were broken by it. There will be no fillibuster.
You will see the true impact when Schumer attempts to run for reelection, and runs square into furious Hispanics, who supported Pataki, and without whom he canot win.
Can you say "SOUTER 2"?
Have you not read posts on this thread which address your question? It's right in front of your face.
T-minus 34 days until the birth of Tha SYNDICATE, the philosophical heir to William Lloyd Garrison.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.
THERE IT IS! CHOOSE BROWN AND LOSE VOTES. GREAT STRATEGERY.
You've lost your mind.
T-minus 34 days until the birth of Tha SYNDICATE, the philosophical heir to William Lloyd Garrison.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.
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.