*LIVE THREAD* DC vs Heller decision due at 10:00 EST (2nd Amendment)

SCOTUS Blog ^ | 6-26-08 | shameless vanity

[RKBA Democrat]

Today is the day.

The folks at SCOTUS blog will be providing a live blog to follow developments as quickly as possible.

[lainie]

too bad Thomas didn’t write a consenting opinion.

[Vaquero]

McCain will appoint another Souter just like Papa Bush did.

[popdonnelly]

“Obama released a comment saying he agrees with the courts decision.”

I call BS. Obama would disarm you in a minute if he thought it was to his political advantage.

[Double Tap]

I think state laws would apply there.

[Roccus]

ICBW, but I’ll bet there was much discussion over whether or not to dis-arm Confederate soldiers, as well as the South after the War Between The States.

[junkman_106]

Where’s my Taurus .38 “Ultra-Lite” ?

[lainie]

bump.

Everyone seems SO SURE he’s a true conservative at heart, despite decades of evidence to the contrary.

[kevkrom]

24 As for the “hundreds of judges,” post, at 2, who have relied on the view of the Second Amendment JUSTICE STEVENS claims we endorsed in Miller: If so, they overread Miller. And their erroneous reliance upon an uncontested and virtually unreasoned case cannot nullify the reliance of millions of Americans (as our historical analysis has shown) upon the true meaning of the right to keep and bear arms. In any event, it should not be thought that the cases decided by these judges would necessarily have come out differently under a proper interpretation of the right.

[Carley]

Reminds me of Colorado’s MAKE MY DAY law.

Check it out! It’s awesome!

[Moose4]

I’ll say this though—that opinion is a judicial b!tchslap of the first order. Scalia absolutely gave Stevens the pimp hand all the way through it.

}:-)4

[WayneS]

Or for Kelo vs New London...

[bvw]

Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."

IE an assault weapon ban is possible, even after Heller. Also all weapons are dangerous. The 2nd's very purpose was TO BREAK FROM the tradition of prohibiting the carry of dangerous weapons!

Heller is no grand victory, it seems.

[xjcsa]

From Scalia's majority opinion, ridiculing the dissent's tortured interpretation of the phrase "keep and bear arms":

It would be rather like saying “He filled and kicked the bucket” to mean “He filled the bucket and died.” Grotesque.

[RasterMaster]

[Orange1998]

It took 32 years for the Washington DC ban to be overturned. What took so long.

[Vaquero]

got any pictures of patriots without varmint rifles?

[1Old Pro]

“Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”

Interesting as it relates to some state restrictions on concealed carry.

[bvw]

Yes ... in fact the legal reasoning of sovereign claims to property for public use had been well worked out back in the 1800’s. The New London ruling “blowed it all up”! Talk about your dangerous weapons!

[WayneS]

That is EXCATLY the choice the framers “made” (sic).

The “evidence” is right there in the 2nd Amendment.

Stevens is a disingenuous jackass.

[Redcloak]

Is it wrong of me to take delight in the fact that Justice Scalia quotes Justice Ginsburg in his discussion on the meaning of the phrase “bear arms”?