Government files amicus -- on DC's side!

Of Arms & The Law ^ | 11 January 2008 | David Hardy

[burzum]

This is the first time in almost a century where the 2nd Amendment goes to the Supreme Court for a fundamental challenge and we are lucky enough to have a Republican Administration. So how does that administration respond? They support the gun grabbers! Part B of the summary almost looks like something the Clinton Administration would have written! This is something I didn’t expect.

[School of Rational Thought]

Curious but not unfamiliar.

Recall the Univeristy of Michigan affirmative action case. The court found it to be unconstitutional but OK to ocntinue until 2025

[mewzilla]

"WHY VOTE REPUBLICAN? Bush DOJ betrays gun rights.

Forget a third party.

We need a second one....

[mvpel]

I would think that they would need to apply super-strict scrutiny, not just strict scrutiny, as it’s dealing with a situation involving prior restraint on a fundamental constitutional right.

But then, arguments in favor of the DC ban tend to be legally and logically ridiculous anyway.

[meyer]

Finally, somebody understands the purpose of the second amendment - and they're scared!

[School of Rational Thought]

“governments interest”????

[meyer]

Forget a third party.
We need a second one....

You can say that again!!

[P8riot]

[supercat]

The good news is it does acknowledge that the Second Amendment is an individual right; the bad news is that it appears to go wholesale against the plain language of "shall not be infringed."

That fits in with their argument on Emerson, does it not?

[Blood of Tyrants]

Their argument goes further than gun control. They basically argue that the government can do ANYTHING if there is a good enough reason for it.

[epow]

No big surprise to me. Bush said during his first campaign that he would sign a renewal of the AWB if Congress sent it to his desk. We all voted for him anyway because the other side was much worse on the RKBA issue and everything else. But look what that got us, the Bush DOJ going to bat for the gungrabbers before the SCOTUS!!

I'll keep saying this until next November if I live that long, NO MORE RINOS, NOT NOW NOT EVER!!. And if RINORudy the NYC gungrabber is nominated he won't get my vote no matter how cleverly he uses weasel-words on the issue now that he needs more than NYC liberals to vote for him. I won't vote for a gungrabber again whether or not he or she is a little better than the opposition on other issues.

[blackie]

I love my black rifle:
Bushmaster M4 A3

[longtermmemmory]

predictable.

it is beltway disease.

The government is about controlling public behavior en masse. It is against individual rights as sure as a leopard has spots.

The could could easily give the strict scrutiny standard and allow it to stand.

The fact the Justice Dept is going to the “change the standard approach” suggests the only avenue to attack the lower court is to change the standard since they appear to be giving in on the facts and the ruling under the higher standard.

It is a weak argument.

(of course it could be a bad argument on purpose to satisfy the beltway insiders. a toss away for cya)

[Kevmo]

Thanks for the ping. I do think that this brief was among several items this week that generated a turning point in the history of our republic. A sad one.

[longtermmemmory]

The bureacrats now consider GWBush an impotent lame duck.

The state department is now rogue, they don’t even listen to Condi Rice any more.

The DC insiders in their heart and soul now feel VERY VERY VERY (did I say very?) confident the democrats will take ALL THREE this election (president, senate, and house)

they don’t have to care what GWBush says.

They can’t be fired due to politics.

The lame duck factore is in full force in DC.

[Boiling point]

IMHO, we are about forty years overdue.

[yarddog]

The Bush administration has quietly been one of the most anti-gun ever. They don’t make a big deal of it and publicly sound pro gun while all the time pushing the knife in our back.

[AuntB]

The DOJ never ceases to amaze. They also went to court against the Salvation Army because the SA wanted their employees to speak English.

[paul51]

This is the kind of government the 2nd was intended to protect us against

[An Old Man]

"They basically argue that the government can do ANYTHING if there is a good enough reason for it."

Scary isn't it! Their arguements are only one step from "good enough reason" to because I say so.

Semper Fi
An Old Man