Skip to comments.Nordyke V King
Posted on 04/20/2009 10:50:34 AM PDT by atomic_dog
We therefore conclude that the right to keep and bear arms is deeply rooted in this Nations history and tradition. Colonial revolutionaries, the Founders, and a host of commentators and lawmakers living during the first one hundred years of the Republic all insisted on the fundamental nature of the right. It has long been regarded as the true palladium of liberty. Colonists relied on it to assert and to win their independence, and the victorious Union sought to prevent a recalcitrant South from abridging it less than a century later. The crucial role this deeply rooted right has played in our birth and history compels us to recognize that it is indeed fundamental, that it is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty that we have inherited. We are therefore persuaded that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it against the states and local governments.
(Excerpt) Read more at ca9.uscourts.gov ...
Hopefully they’re breaking from their tradition of “Most Frequently Reversed”.
Someone please explain this to we the unwashed.....please
Must be some of those terrorists that DHS warned us about.
Catch this from the background portion of the opinion: Supervisor Mary King had gotten the run around from spineless people hiding behind the constitution ..."
Hiding behind the Constitution, Mary? Better take another look at your oath of office, you idiot.
Basically, I think it means that states can't usurp the second amendment via state or local law.
Anyone want to add or correct me on this?
This means the States in the 9th Circuit (West Coast and Mountain West) have to follow the 2nd Amendment.
Most of the Federal Bill of Rights applies to the States through the 14th Amendment, the 2nd Amendment historically has not.
Not exactly ... in getting this one right, it was necessary for them to reverse themselves albeit with the notion that SCOTUS would if they didn't. Dripping with irony, no?
I'm not sure this is a complete victory as I think choosing a direct application of the Second would be better than using the Fourteenth, but reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks.
That is one of the most shocking statements I have ever heard come from a government employee at any level.
I wonder if she feels the same contempt for people who "hide behind" the Constitution when refusing to sit at the back of the bus, eat at the "black" counter or have the gall to go to a all white school. I'm guessing she doesn't.
NOTE: The 2nd Amendment is SELF-incorporated to all government entities at every level. It is MORE ABSOLUTE than the 1st Amendment, or any of the others, because the wording forbids not only CONGRESS, but ANYONE from infringing on it. The 1st says Congress shall make no law.... The 2nd say shall NOT be infringed! Period! End of debate!
This applies only to the States within the 9th Circuit.
This ought to get the liberals panties in a knot. More like a gigantic wedgie.
To keep your same theme, what about those people hiding behind the constitution allowing her to vote.
Amazing. This is the 9th?
Maybe there is hope after all.
What? No, I don't believe that's accurate. Unless this is set aside by SCOTUS, this will be cited in all relative cases regardless of Appellate district in which they may fall.
I think all of us agree with you, but we have to play the game here and make it “legal”. I will find this amusing because it should make national news and we’ll see if “the one” is asked to comment on it. Yes, I believe the 2nd amendment says individuals have a right to keep and bear arms and the 14th amendment is the incorporation amendment. What will be left unsaid is he wants to get rid of the 2nd and make the incorporation of it moot.
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.