Rudy Julie-Annie was unavailable for comment.According to aides, upon hearing of the ruling he had an apoplectic fit and fell to the floor unconscious. To prevent further fits he in now being kept in a medically induced coma.
Posted on 03/10/2007 5:07:50 AM PST by libstripper
Curious: Maybe Carl Rowan will write an editorial about this. He didn't get any jail time, did he? :-\
Intersting question and I don't know the answer. Note the following, however: The first 15 pages or so of the Court's decision deal with the issue of "standing," that is, whether the plaintiffs have suffered sufficient harm distinct from the public at large to challenge the Washington D.C. gun laws in Federal Court. The rules on standing have historically been a moving target in that the SCOTUS has relaxed the rules when they want to hear a case on the merits and have tightened the rules when they don't want to address a case on the merits. Given the Supreme Court's long history of side-stepping the Second Amenedment, there is a very good chance that it will take the case, only to reverse on the issue of standing so that it can once again avoid the merits of the dispute. (The SCOTUS has decided very few 2nd Amendment cases over the years, and of those cases, it has avoided the two issues crucial to the 2nd Amendment debate: Whether the 2nd Amendment is a collective or individual right and whether the 2nd Amendment applies to the states as a result of the 14th Amendment.)
There is also the possibility that no one will take an appeal because if the Supreme Court affirms the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals, then the gun laws in many states and localities are one step closer to doom, and thus, the gun grabbers would rather limit the decision to the D.C. Circuit rather than risk a Supreme Court decision that is binding in all jurisdictions. On the other hand, 2nd Amendment advocates may not want the case to go to the SCOTUS either, because if the Supreme Court reverses the Circuit Court of Appeals on the merits, and rules in favor of a collective rights theory, then the gun grabbers could outlaw the private ownership of firearms.
I agree with you. Some shyster will lose money if an armed citizen kills his client. The criminal will never need the lawyer again.
Don't be so sure the SC would sustain this decision. After all, it didn't declare MF unconstitutional.
My understating is that he didn't.His trial ended in a hung jury and he wasn't re-tried.
I doubt that we'll be hearing much from Mr Rowan about this in the future,however.He died a few years back.
Rudy Julie-Annie was unavailable for comment.According to aides, upon hearing of the ruling he had an apoplectic fit and fell to the floor unconscious. To prevent further fits he in now being kept in a medically induced coma.
Not so fast. Go to a Blacks Law Dictionary or a Bouviers Law Dictionary and look up the definition of the United States. You will find there are THREE United States. This is why certain laws and rights, particularly Constitutional rights are seemingly applied at the Government's whim. What happended in DC will not be applied to the US at large.
There is the United States, the organic states of the Union. There is the United States as a Nation State among the nations. And there is the United States of DC and all it owns. Which one are you subject to?
I don't laugh out loud at the WaPo too often, but this did it for me. New and dangerous, my Aunt Fanny!
What a bunch of nanny-state, candy-butt wimps!
That was before Roberts and Alito made it to the bench. If Stephens or Ginsburg goes out before Dubya leaves office, the gun grabbers are definitely doomed(as well as Roe v. Wade).
I've been disappointed with the out of control spending, and his stance on the border, but he's made some pretty good judicial nominations.
Bigger than that. The appeals court has declared that the Second Amendment is a right of individuals in DC. As such US Code Title 18, Section 241. "Conspiracy against rights" applies:
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; orAs I read this, if masked, Ninja-clad agents bust down the door of a citizen of the US in DC, and point a weapon at a citizen as a result of his exercising his 2nd Amendment right, they are themselves subject to fine, imprisonment, or executionIf two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
So true. As an NRA Endowing Member the possibility of a SCOTUS appeal worries me. Since they declared the blatantly unconstitutional MF (double meaning intended) law constitutional, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they granted certiorari in this case and reversed the DC Court of Appeals on a disastrous "collective right" theory.
It is a very dangerous ruling for those who would take our guns, but it is a ruling to celebrate by normal Americans.
Yep, freedom is highly overrated. That pesky Bill of Rights is always getting in the way of Progress.
>>The Washington Post has armed guards at its worksites.
Does anyone have any pictures or other documentation of this?
I love rubbing Lib's noses in the hypocrisy of their leaders and house organs.
I think the kids were inspired by "The Swimmer" (the movie, not Ted Kennedy), and it was just a teen fad in that area, however annoying it might be to homeowners in red state America, it obviously was a crime against humanity in the blue part.
Calling John Lott...
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.