Supreme Court Orders and Opinions

SCOTUS ^ | Tom Goldstein

[TexasRedeye]

The Court has announced that it will release opinions against (sic) at 10am Wednesday.

[Niteranger68]

For those who missed it:
D.C. vs. Heller
The Supreme Court Gun Control Case
Media Briefing Book
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/misc/Heller%20-%20Media%20Briefing%20Book%20-%20public.pdf

[Puppage]

Heller vs DC

If they go against Heller, than it stands to reason that the Bill of Rights has nothing to do with We, The People. It'll mean that the 1st Amendment allows for the state to speak freely about itself. How could it mean otherwise if they decide that the 2A is about the state?

They CAN'T freaking choose this Amendment is for The People oh, and THIS one is for ther state.

God help us all.

[skimbell]

Check out the link. The first sentence of the second paragraph pretty much addresses both of your concerns.

[Jack Black]

If they go against Heller, than it stands to reason that the Bill of Rights has nothing to do with We, The People.

Yes. We will have to act accordingly. It will show that we Constitutional conservatives have been routed and that the government is fully in control of leftists. We will be then, effectively, a Republic in Name Only.

I think for many people it will be an important psychological breaking point. Whether and when to continue to cooperate with the RINO States of America will be a constant question we will have to ask each other. What forms of resistance to tyrany will be most effective? How much of America do we want to win back?

[thefrankbaum]

Medellin v. Texas was already decided. Texas won. I was actually presented with the fact pattern before knowing anything about the case, and I made the exact same argument as CJ Robert's opinion - go me! :-P

[DCBryan1]

if they go against Heller..... Buy every single gun, magazine, spare part, ammo, etc. you can get your hands on.....today!!! Then send your wife to buy shovels, pucks, and 5” wide PVC pups.

[DCBryan1]

frigging auto spell checker......PICKS/PIPES

[processing please hold]

Thank you.

How the sam hill did I miss that? I had a USSC google alert just for that decision.

I was actually presented with the fact pattern before knowing anything about the case, and I made the exact same argument as CJ Robert's opinion - go me! :-P

Kudos from me. I don't see how it could have gone any differently. I know Gingsberg(spel?) thinks we should follow international laws. Stupid byotch, her job would be eliminated if that were to happen.

[cajungirl]

why do we want 5” pvc pubs? What exactly do they do?

[Old Teufel Hunden]

The only Justice without a majority opinion from that sitting is Justice Scalia.

Third, and most importantly, Scalia may not be in the majority in the Heller case - there simply are no guarantees

I'm trying to understand your reasoning here. They said that there is only one case left from the March term. They said that Scalia is the only one without a majority opinion from the sitting. Are you afraid of what Scalia would write in regards to a majority opinion for the only case left in that sitting (Heller)? I'm not, in fact I'm esctatic because Scalia would write an opinion that gives the broadest interpretation of the individual right of 2A on that court next to Thomas.

[tx4guns]

Seal up rifles/shotguns in them and seal/bury them for a rainy day. Be sure to include the dry packs to soak up moisture.

[Mariebl]

I'm trying to understand your reasoning here. They said that there is only one case left from the March term. They said that Scalia is the only one without a majority opinion from the sitting.

Supreme Court justices are not guaranteed opportunities to write majority opinions. If Justice Scalia is not in the majority on Heller, he won't be writing the majority opinion. It's that simple. The fact that he hasn't written one this term doesn't mean a thing. I'm feeling optimistic about how Heller will turn out, but there's no point in fantasizing.

[stan_sipple]

opinions against America and for Euros

[El Gato]

With pressure from conservatives he will might appoint good people.

Best face we can put on it at this point. He's not shown great response in the past to pressure from conservatives, why would he start *after* he's elected President? Especially considering his age, which might make him a one termer.

[NinoFan]

Actually, it does. The Court tends to share the love when it comes to assigning opinions. If Scalia weren’t writing Heller, he most likely would have been given ANOTHER case from that sitting to write, because that’s just the way the Court (whether the CJ or the senior justice if CJ is not in the majority) does things. That’s just the way it goes.

[green iguana]

but there's no point in fantasizing.

Unless you know more than the folk who write the SCOTUSblog, it hardly seems to be fantasy. To quote them:

"It does look exceptionally likely that Justice Scalia is writing the principal opinion for the Court in Heller – the D.C. guns case. That is the only opinion remaining from the sitting and he is the only member of the Court not to have written a majority opinion from the sitting. There is no indication that he lost a majority from March. His only dissent from the sitting is for two Justices in Indiana v. Edwards. So, that’s a good sign for advocates of a strong individual rights conception of the Second Amendment and a bad sign for D.C."

[Hacklehead]

“It does look exceptionally likely that Justice Scalia is writing the principal opinion for the Court in Heller – the D.C. guns case. That is the only opinion remaining from the sitting and he is the only member of the Court not to have written a majority opinion from the sitting.”

Put in context that leads to quite a different conclusion than the isolated sentence we had before.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Supreme Court justices are not guaranteed opportunities to write majority opinions."

I'm no expert on the Supreme Court, but it appears the way that the blog entry writes is that they may not be guaranteed to write a majority opinion but they get to write at least one majority opinion per sitting. Is this true or no?

[Old Teufel Hunden]

I’m sorry, what I meant to say from my previous post is that it looks like they may not be guaranteed to write a majority opinion but it looks like the way the blogger writes is that usually every judge gets to write one majority and one minority opinion per sitting. While not bound by law, perhaps that is how it usually works.

[Ancesthntr]

I'm trying to understand your reasoning here. They said that there is only one case left from the March term. They said that Scalia is the only one without a majority opinion from the sitting. Are you afraid of what Scalia would write in regards to a majority opinion for the only case left in that sitting (Heller)? I'm not, in fact I'm esctatic because Scalia would write an opinion that gives the broadest interpretation of the individual right of 2A on that court next to Thomas.

I think that you misunderstood my thoughts. I merely stated that Scalia is not guaranteed to write ANY majority opinion in ANY session of the Court. Why? First, because he has to BE PART OF THE MAJORITY. If he's on the losing side in Heller, then he won't write the majority opinion, PERIOD. Second, even if he's part of the majority, the Chief Justice (who, I'll assume, will vote the same way in this case) decides who's going to write the majority opinion. He could name himself, Scalia, Thomas or anyone else.

I, too, would be ecstatic if Scalia got to write the majority opinion, because:

a) That would mean that the DC gun ban has been overturned;

b) That the 2nd would HAVE to have been recognized as protecting an individual right; and

c) That one of the most conservative Justices would be writing for us, a man who's writing is very powerful and persuasive.

Let's hope that Scalia DOES write the majority opinion, while at the same time understanding that there's no guarantee of that EVEN IF gun owners win in Heller.